Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

Media => Member Creations => Topic started by: astrostu on August 01, 2011, 12:46:31 AM

Title: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 159: What's a Planet?
Post by: astrostu on August 01, 2011, 12:46:31 AM
Hi all!  After thinking about doing this for about two years and finally carving out some non-free time to do this in, I thought I'd have a go at my first podcast.  I realize it's probably still rough and the audio may not be the bestest there ever was (blame it on a $40 headset I've been using for the last 3 years), but my first episode is up:  Introduction and the Dark Side of the Moon (direct link) (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/podcasts/PseudoAstro_001.mp3).

If you really truly want to, you can subscribe to it by copying the feed URL to your software of choice:  feed://podcast.sjrdesign.net/pseudoastropodcast.rss .

Consider this both the first episode and the pilot episode.  I have two others already outlined, I've done some test recordings, thrown them out, and this is already the third recording of the first episode.  I'd really like to get some feedback before recording the "final" version of the next episode.  Constructive feedback is greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 12:56:40 AM
 ;D

Anyone who loves pink Floyd knows there is no dark side of the moon. It's all dark. Good start!
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Parrot on August 01, 2011, 04:12:38 AM
Great choice in music, classic radio educational show type of stuff. 

Pretty straightforward content.  I'm eager to hear you go over the stuff that people actually dispute, though.  That's where the most interesting facts pop up.

As for the puzzler, that's really interesting.  I'm going to have to think on it.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Caffiene on August 01, 2011, 05:35:06 AM
Nice.

Presentation: A+
Very clear, well spoken and easy to understand. It gave me a sort of educational lecture/presentation vibe. (If you want it to be more conversational, I think you could easily use a less slow and measured style and still be perfectly easy to understand)

Sound quality: A
Clean and clear audio. If anything just a little too clear, in that I occasionally felt like there was a little too much "mouth noise". But Ive very susceptible to noticing that and even then it was nowhere near a level Id find unpleasant.

Content: B
I felt like you were having trouble deciding what knowledge level audience you wanted to target, and it got you into a bit of trouble. The information itself was fine, but some of the level of explanation seemed inconsistent. For example, you explained that "the moon's orbital period (its year), is the same its its rotation (its day)", but later you throw out "Keppler was able to figure out" without any mention of who Keppler is. Although it might actually be my problem rather than yours, since I knew most of that information anyway so Im only guessing at what the intended audience would think too. I just felt it was a bit strange.

Puzzler: A+
Cant speak for anyone else, but I like the idea and the audience participation. I also found the puzzler straightforward enough to be easy to start thinking about, while still being an interesting enough question to be fun to think about.


Other note: I like the music, but the intro music seemed slightly long. It got me in a listening mood, but I was ready and waiting for the content to start for a while before the music finished.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 01:55:34 PM
What was it again? What would the phases of the moon look like if the moon were a cube?

And I hope you will remind us in this thread of new podcasts until it goes on iTunes!
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 03:43:27 PM
Eclipse Cube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgcRsz6UHdQ#)

Eclipes cube 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iCG43mcp18#)

Eclipse cube 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h5V0uf11ts#)

Would they be rectangles that get progressively fatter till we had a square and then thinner till no moon? I think I'm too close in my videos and I end up with too much curvature in the shadow. The normal half moon makes me think it's more the curvature of the moon than the earth that makes the crescent look.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 03:47:15 PM
But during an luner eclipse it's the shadow of the earth and it looks curved.

(http://vikitr.net/data/media/127/6_lunar-eclipse.jpg)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 03:49:35 PM
Well duh, I was making an eclipse instead of phases. The videos are even labeled right

(http://planettransit.webs.com/photos/moon_phases2_big.jpg)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 03:52:06 PM
comment deleted
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 04:08:24 PM
Shit now I was rotating te moon way too fast. One rotation for every revolution. What's the oreintation of the cube to the Earth? What's the near vs dark side  >:D of the cube?
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 04:33:27 PM
The puzzler was a white moon cube with one side facing the Earth. Assume you can only see the side facing the Earth (i.e. neglect parallax).
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 04:39:54 PM
What would parallax have to do with the view?
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 04:41:26 PM
Phase corner (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiNLR-JLxBA#)

Phase edge (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKqhXdkg0dQ#)

Phase flat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEZq5Tpajtw#)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 04:45:17 PM
What would parallax have to do with the view?

One would be able to see the sides, and not just the face facing the Earth, when the cube moon is on the horizon. Also we need to neglect the Libration cycle. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 04:46:08 PM
So it's a white square that varies in brightness night to night for half the month, then a quick sweep across the face of the sunlight and then a dark square that varies in darkness due to earth shine for the other half?
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 04:50:25 PM
What would parallax have to do with the view?

One would be able to see the sides, and not just the face facing the Earth, when the cube moon is on the horizon. Also we need to neglect the Libration cycle. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration)

Get libration, still ignorant on parallax. ohhh, nevermind. You are too smart to play.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 04:50:49 PM
If you also neglect Earthshine and starshine and the diameter of the Sun, the face facing us would be completely black for half the month, light up instantly at quadrature, and remain illuminated for the remaining half of the month, then instantly go dark at the other quadrature.

ETA: Not exactly at quadrature but close.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 04:55:18 PM
Get libration, still ignorant on parallax.

The Moon's diameter (or length across the face for a cube moon) is 2000 miles. The Earth's radius is 4000 miles. Folks viewing the Moon when it's on the horizon would be able to see the sides of a cube moon.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 01, 2011, 06:38:13 PM
Thanks for the feedback, especially from Caffiene. On the "mouth noise," I agree, I actually tried to move the mic a little farther away and started putting my hand up between my mouth and it when I was breathing in.  I think practice is needed to minimize that and perhaps some sort of post-production filter could help, as well.

Regarding the puzzler ... I guess it's the teacher in me and the "NO TALKING TO YOUR NEIGHBOR!!" that made me think people wouldn't discuss it on here, but I'm actually quite surprised how some of you have taken such an interest in solving it.  I'm not going to go over the solution on here nor tell you who is correct (if anyone) until I discuss it on the show, though based on the feedback, I'll probably do that on the next episode instead of waiting until September.

The discussion has also reminded me I need to remember to state things that are "obvious" to astronomers but not so much to everyone else:  In problems like these, you should assume ideal conditions unless otherwise stated, and you can ignore minute effects.  So like, no, there are no craters.  The moon has zero ellipticity, zero inclination, zero obliquity.  That kind of thing.  If you don't ignore it, as some of you aren't, then the answers get a bit more complicated, as you're discussing.  If any of my students had gone there when I asked this question, they'd get extra credit ;).

The next two episodes - and most episodes - will be about more of the conspiracy/creationism/hoax material.  I just thought I'd start with something fairly innocuous.

Regarding the music, it took me FOREVER to decide on something that wasn't absolutely horrible nor obviously recognizable and still in copyright.  Glad people think it's okay, though I agree the intro could be cut down a bit ... only problem is I think that what should be cut are a few bars in the intermediate, not from the end nor beginning.  I'll work on that for the next episode.

Regarding the level of the material, I swore I would never forget what the "average" person knows and assume they know more or less, but it's happened.  10 years of post-high school work on this stuff and ... yeah.  I'll try to work on that more in the future.

On adding to this post with new episodes - I've seen two approaches on here with that.  Karl (Conspiracy Skeptic) just adds to his original thread started aeons ago.  Parrot (Dumbass) creates new ones for every episode.  Is there a preferred approach?  I can see pros and cons to both.

Oh, and can anyone recommend a better microphone/headset that doesn't run in the $hundreds?  I've been using a Logitech I got a few years ago to use with Skype, but I think it sounds like I'm talking into a tin can.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 06:44:06 PM
Way to go Chew! Blowing the curve for everyone! Dork!
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 01, 2011, 06:46:50 PM
I like a legacy thread. You can change the name of thread for new episodes like Carl does sometimes.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 07:38:27 PM
Way to go Chew! Blowing the curve for everyone! Dork!

(http://www.myemoticons.com/emoticons/images/msn/our-favourite/raspberry.gif)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 01, 2011, 07:45:03 PM
The next two episodes - and most episodes - will be about more of the conspiracy/creationism/hoax material.

The JREF Stundie Finals threads (http://forums.randi.org/tags.php?tag=stundie+awards) are a gold mine of just plain wrong.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Caffiene on August 01, 2011, 08:57:44 PM
face facing us would be completely black for half the month, light up instantly at quadrature, and remain illuminated for the remaining half of the month, then instantly go dark at the other quadrature.

That was my thinking too. Only other thing is there would be changes in brightness during the illuminated phase due to the angle of the sun on the plane.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Parrot on August 01, 2011, 09:42:03 PM
Thanks for the feedback, especially from Caffiene. On the "mouth noise," I agree, I actually tried to move the mic a little farther away and started putting my hand up between my mouth and it when I was breathing in.  I think practice is needed to minimize that and perhaps some sort of post-production filter could help, as well.

Oh, and can anyone recommend a better microphone/headset that doesn't run in the $hundreds?  I've been using a Logitech I got a few years ago to use with Skype, but I think it sounds like I'm talking into a tin can.

I only just recently got myself a full head set.  Previously I was using one of those mics that you hold in your palm to speak into.  I was holding it so that it was actually facing away from my mouth so that it wouldn't pick up the sound of me breathing for the podcast.  Then I amplified the results.

My current headset seems to work pretty well, it has foam around the mic so I think that helps to muffle stray noises.  Just a standard headset that I picked up at Staples on sale.  I think it was Staples brand.

So if you think my latest podcast has decent sound quality, that's what I'm using.  I wouldn't really know though - I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing  ;)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Caffiene on August 01, 2011, 09:56:56 PM
I think it sounds like I'm talking into a tin can.

I thought it sounded fine, personally, apart from the very minor mouth noises. But I dont know what you sound like when youre not on a podcast, so I dont know if its accurate or not.

Im not an expert on mics, but the "word on the street" that I hear is Zahlman mics are highly recommended for low cost/consumer use.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Parrot on August 01, 2011, 10:08:35 PM
Here's my fiddling around with the puzzler.  I'm not sure exactly about the angle, perhaps it would be a more reasonable facsimile of the lighting conditions to have the moon at center with the light source for the quarter moon, in which case I think the surface would be mostly dark.

(http://www.mongwell.com/gmfiles/cubemoon/Gibbous.jpg)

(http://www.mongwell.com/gmfiles/cubemoon/Quarter.jpg)

(http://www.mongwell.com/gmfiles/cubemoon/Crescent1.jpg)

(http://www.mongwell.com/gmfiles/cubemoon/Crescent2.jpg)

(http://www.mongwell.com/gmfiles/cubemoon/New.jpg)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 02, 2011, 11:40:09 AM
After a day, 26 people have downloaded it!  I'm almost 0.05% of the way towards the listenership of AstronomyCast! :D
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: craig on August 02, 2011, 11:45:27 AM
I really liked the podcast.  It will definately be one that I subscribe to.

My only complaint is the sibilance, but it sounds like you are already looking at new microphones so I expect that that will help.

Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 02, 2011, 11:56:37 AM
I really liked the podcast.  It will definately be one that I subscribe to.

My only complaint is the sibilance, but it sounds like you are already looking at new microphones so I expect that that will help.

Keep up the good work.

Thank you.  That annoyed me to no end when listening to it, too.  I don't suppose you know of an audio filter (post-recording) that would help minimize that in the meantime?  I was thinking maybe a low-bandpass?  Oh, and you introduced me to my new word of the day. :)
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: seaotter on August 02, 2011, 12:20:05 PM
Who have good sounding podcasts? You might ask them their set up.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 04, 2011, 11:54:27 PM
w00t! I figured out how to add a comments feature to the individual pages of the podcast website. :)  Not the most picturesque, but it's functional. :)  Also, I talked with Pamela Gay and she recommended the Blue-brand microphones.  I'm looking into their Yeti model.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 10, 2011, 03:29:21 PM
I have a new microphone and have posted a test file here (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/MicrophoneTest.mp3).  The second one is the new one ... hopefully the more gooder.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Chew on August 10, 2011, 04:24:53 PM
I prefer the Logitech one. Much crisper sounding.
Title: Re: Introducing the Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast! - The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: astrostu on August 15, 2011, 10:51:16 PM
Hi guys, gals, and residents of neutopia.  Episode 2 is now up, "You Can’t Know the Distance, Size, and Speed of UFOs."  Shownotes here. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_002.php)  And a new puzzler!  And the solution to the first one. At least one person DID get it right ;).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Caffiene on August 15, 2011, 11:00:39 PM
Cool! Sounds interesting.

Btw, you might want to put the podcast site in your sig.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 15, 2011, 11:40:36 PM
Btw, you might want to put the podcast site in your sig.
Kept meaning to do it, kept forgetting. :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 16, 2011, 02:39:32 PM
w00t!  It's now in iTunes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Parrot on August 16, 2011, 09:20:06 PM
Great stuff!  I hadn't really thought about why it's more difficult to gauge distances and speeds for objects in the air before.  The explanation is really interesting.

The puzzler is much harder this time, it doesn't lend itself well to home experimentation.  Are all the clues needed to figure it out in the podcast or is this just something we have to think over on our own?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 16, 2011, 11:23:13 PM
Great stuff!  I hadn't really thought about why it's more difficult to gauge distances and speeds for objects in the air before.  The explanation is really interesting.
Thanks.  I hope it was clear.  Could you tell that these guys irk me sometimes? ;)

How were the interspersed clips?  Too much?  Too little?  Need bigger pause or setup?  I ask because I plan on using a lot of clips in the future, especially as I get into creationism, 2012, and the moon hoax, but I don't want to go over- nor under-board.

The puzzler is much harder this time, it doesn't lend itself well to home experimentation.  Are all the clues needed to figure it out in the podcast or is this just something we have to think over on our own?
Just something you'll have to think about on your own.  You could actually experiment with this if you wanted by getting a bright bulb and taking, say, a pea and a grape, putting them various distances away, and standing REALLY far away, but it may be difficult to judge sizes.  I think that could help you with the first part, not the second, though.  I got the idea for this one from an intro astro lab I taught 6 years ago that I had BIG issues with because it didn't actually treat [the answer] correctly. ;)

I'm not really sure where I'm going with the puzzler.  The real reason this week's 'cast was about UFOs and not creationism and comets is that I couldn't think of a good puzzler based on that topic.  I don't want something that's just "look it up," I want something that requires thinking and is somewhat based on where the [villain of the week] went wrong with their thinking.  I don't think that's going to be possible every time, though ... as my issue with the comets is showing.

I'm also workin' on a logo.  It's a bit cartoony, but the concept is an opening door (square door since the "album art" for the podcast is square) with a guy peeking out representing the "exposing" part.  I don't dislike what I came up with in 20 minutes this afternoon, but feedback would be 'preciated!

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/logo.jpg)

If you like the concept, tweaks I'm thinking of are to "open" the door more to allow for bigger text.  I want to use the handwriting font, but I realize it doesn't show up too well on an iPod nano.  :-\  I was also thinking maybe a flashlight effect coming through the door that encompasses the text?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Parrot on August 17, 2011, 01:18:41 AM
Thanks.  I hope it was clear.  Could you tell that these guys irk me sometimes? ;)

I thought you were very clear.  And yeah, people like this can be a little troublesome to deal with, because they are just unwilling to accept that their perceptions may be leading them astray.

I've actually experienced a UFO sighting, and not too long ago either.  I may mention it sometime in my podcast.  It was in the afternoon/evening, still light out.  I was looking out my window and saw a light in the sky that seemed to be moving much faster than would be warranted by something far enough away for me to see only as a point of light.

I saw it for a good 10 or 20 seconds before it disappeared.  If I was of a mind to jump to these kind of conclusions, I would adamantly proclaim that I saw something moving in ways that are impossible for any known earthly craft.  But since I understand what the U in UFO stands for, I just thought "Wow, that's really interesting.  I wonder what that was?"

My best guess is a helicopter, since I live nearby a hospital and they fly in emergency patients every so often.  It still seemed to be moving faster than I would have expected of a helicopter, but I knew that these kinds of things can be much more difficult to judge than you would expect.

So I knew that it was deceptively easy to fool yourself when judging the speed and size of objects in the sky, but you've made it much clearer to me exactly how that works.

Quote
How were the interspersed clips?  Too much?  Too little?  Need bigger pause or setup?  I ask because I plan on using a lot of clips in the future, especially as I get into creationism, 2012, and the moon hoax, but I don't want to go over- nor under-board.

Well, keep in mind that I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing myself, but I usually try to at least work in enough of a quote to accurately illustrate the position of the people I'm arguing against.  Cutting it down too much would risk quoting somebody out of context, and I think that's the biggest problem that you want to look out for.

I didn't think your clips were too long, and they accurately illustrated the kinds of arguments that were being made.  I say it's good to be fairly liberal in interspersing clips.  That way you can make sure to yourself, and demonstrate to your audience, that you're not attacking a straw man.

That said, of course it's true that you don't want the clips to dominate the show.  Hopefully people are listening because they're interested in what *you* have to say.  But I think you'd have to go pretty far in order to make a serious mistake in that direction.

Quote
I'm also workin' on a logo.  It's a bit cartoony, but the concept is an opening door (square door since the "album art" for the podcast is square) with a guy peeking out representing the "exposing" part.  I don't dislike what I came up with in 20 minutes this afternoon, but feedback would be 'preciated!

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/logo.jpg)

If you like the concept, tweaks I'm thinking of are to "open" the door more to allow for bigger text.  I want to use the handwriting font, but I realize it doesn't show up too well on an iPod nano.  :-\  I was also thinking maybe a flashlight effect coming through the door that encompasses the text?

I think it looks good, but I'm wondering if it would lend itself to too many "coming out of the closet" jokes.  And while those would be really cool jokes, I would think that for a logo the joke should be more clearly demonstrated.

Have you considered a cartoon telescope with arms and legs wearing a trench coat?  He could have his back turned with the trench coat flung open, and he's looking back over his shoulder at the audience with a mischievous grin on his face.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 01:36:05 AM
Arrrgh! Damned professional astronomers! Every amateur astronomer knows your index finger held at arms length subtends 2 degrees!

Good episode. Excellent audio quality.

Congrats, Dumbass!

The "trained observer" argument from authority drives me up the wall. I served 20 years in the Navy and can confidently say there is no "Identifying Things in the Sky You've Never Seen Before, Hell, I Can't Even Find the North Star" school in the military.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 01:43:49 AM
Puzzler: No and No.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 17, 2011, 02:37:15 AM
I thought you were very clear.  And yeah, people like this can be a little troublesome to deal with, because they are just unwilling to accept that their perceptions may be leading them astray.
Me? Wrong? That's unpossible.

I've actually experienced a UFO sighting, and not too long ago either.  I may mention it sometime in my podcast.  It was in the afternoon/evening, still light out.  I was looking out my window and saw a light in the sky that seemed to be moving much faster than would be warranted by something far enough away for me to see only as a point of light.

I saw it for a good 10 or 20 seconds before it disappeared.  If I was of a mind to jump to these kind of conclusions, I would adamantly proclaim that I saw something moving in ways that are impossible for any known earthly craft.  But since I understand what the U in UFO stands for, I just thought "Wow, that's really interesting.  I wonder what that was?"

My best guess is a helicopter, since I live nearby a hospital and they fly in emergency patients every so often.  It still seemed to be moving faster than I would have expected of a helicopter, but I knew that these kinds of things can be much more difficult to judge than you would expect.
I've seen two UFOs, or two groups.  One at night while observing on the 'scopes, one during the day.  The first one at night, it was a group of white objects that rose up and was constantly changing formation and just rose up into the sky.  I actually know they were rising because I saw them come up from below the building I was in.  I figured they were white birds.  Same with the second formation I saw during the day while driving to Yellowstone last year.  Couldn't figure out what they were, kept driving, eventually was under them and it was a group of metallic ultra-light aircraft.

I think it looks good, but I'm wondering if it would lend itself to too many "coming out of the closet" jokes.  And while those would be really cool jokes, I would think that for a logo the joke should be more clearly demonstrated.

Have you considered a cartoon telescope with arms and legs wearing a trench coat?  He could have his back turned with the trench coat flung open, and he's looking back over his shoulder at the audience with a mischievous grin on his face.

Hmm.  Your suggestion would require significantly more than my skillz in vector graphics would allow.  You wanna design it? :D  Though it does sound a bit creepy ... I'd rather be coming out of the closet - or just out and proud - than be a pedophile. ;)

Arrrgh! Damned professional astronomers! Every amateur astronomer knows your index finger held at arms length subtends 2 degrees!

Yeah, I considered putting in the "rule of thumb" for figuring out angles.  But it can get complicated.  Maybe I'll do it in the next one -- add a segment for feedback and include that in there?

Good episode. Excellent audio quality.

Thanks!  I was a bit worried since you said that the old microphone sounded better in the test, but I tried to fiddle with some of the settings a bit more this time to make it sound less compressed.

The "trained observer" argument from authority drives me up the wall. I served 20 years in the Navy and can confidently say there is no "Identifying Things in the Sky You've Never Seen Before, Hell, I Can't Even Find the North Star" school in the military.

Good to know as a Navy guy you're willing to admit you have no authority in figuring out unknown objects in the sky ;).  And yeah, finding the north star can be ... a pain.  I can't wait for 13,000 years to pass and it'll be Vega again, then it'll be super-easy.

Oh, and care to elaborate on your solution to the puzzler (either here or by e-mail so that you don't reveal to other people how to answer it correctly or incorrectly, as the case may be)?  It kinda reminds me of judging a Science Olympiad back in undergrad.  I wrote a question giving the students all the information they needed to just use E=m*c^2 to figure out the lifetime of the sun, but all I asked them was, "How long will the sun fuse hydrogen?"  I forgot to put in there, "Show your work," or "Using the information above ..."  One guy just wrote down the correct answer and I had to give him full credit -- pissed me off!  So, not saying you're right or wrong yet, but you should explain your work ;).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 03:11:26 AM
Arrrgh! Damned professional astronomers! Every amateur astronomer knows your index finger held at arms length subtends 2 degrees!

Yeah, I considered putting in the "rule of thumb" for figuring out angles.  But it can get complicated.  Maybe I'll do it in the next one -- add a segment for feedback and include that in there?

Nah. Just sumthin to remember next time.


Quote
Good episode. Excellent audio quality.

Thanks!  I was a bit worried since you said that the old microphone sounded better in the test, but I tried to fiddle with some of the settings a bit more this time to make it sound less compressed.

Yeah, I was surprised at the quality. It sounded much better than the test file you posted.

Quote
The "trained observer" argument from authority drives me up the wall. I served 20 years in the Navy and can confidently say there is no "Identifying Things in the Sky You've Never Seen Before, Hell, I Can't Even Find the North Star" school in the military.

Good to know as a Navy guy you're willing to admit you have no authority in figuring out unknown objects in the sky ;).

Not as a Navy guy, just as an amateur astronomer and a Class C Skeptic. They called me "Eagle Eye" in the Navy. I could see ships and stuff in fog before anybody else and see masts poking above the horizon before they were detected on radar. I assume all my star-gazing helped with that.

Quote
And yeah, finding the north star can be ... a pain.  I can't wait for 13,000 years to pass and it'll be Vega again, then it'll be super-easy.

Oh, and care to elaborate on your solution to the puzzler (either here or by e-mail so that you don't reveal to other people how to answer it correctly or incorrectly, as the case may be)?  It kinda reminds me of judging a Science Olympiad back in undergrad.  I wrote a question giving the students all the information they needed to just use E=m*c^2 to figure out the lifetime of the sun, but all I asked them was, "How long will the sun fuse hydrogen?"  I forgot to put in there, "Show your work," or "Using the information above ..."  One guy just wrote down the correct answer and I had to give him full credit -- pissed me off!  So, not saying you're right or wrong yet, but you should explain your work ;).

You didn't say anything about having to show our work in the podcast!

Short answer: insignificant size differences at such great distances.

Also, it looks like you have a stalker in the comments section.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 17, 2011, 07:32:44 PM
Also, it looks like you have a stalker in the comments section.
Talking about the one on the website or on the blog?  On the blog, yes, Michael Horn stalks me.  On the website, not sure who the commenter is, but he's incoherent.


So, I was mucking around in C4D today and came up with this rendering of the revised logo.  I'm posting it normal size and small (how it'd appear as album art).  What think all'y'all?

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/logo2.jpg)

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/logo2small.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 07:42:48 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 17, 2011, 08:46:42 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.

I could render in stars or planets or something, but I think it looks cluttered if I do that.  Perhaps one more element that could peek out?  Unless you're suggesting a completely different design.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: seaotter on August 17, 2011, 09:05:48 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.

I could render in stars or planets or something, but I think it looks cluttered if I do that.  Perhaps one more element that could peek out?  Unless you're suggesting a completely different design.

Agree, I like it as is.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 10:13:29 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.

I could render in stars or planets or something, but I think it looks cluttered if I do that.  Perhaps one more element that could peek out?  Unless you're suggesting a completely different design.

Agree, I like it as is.

Didn't you screw up the first puzzler? Shut yer trap.

Don't listen to him, Stu!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: seaotter on August 17, 2011, 11:24:03 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.

I could render in stars or planets or something, but I think it looks cluttered if I do that.  Perhaps one more element that could peek out?  Unless you're suggesting a completely different design.

Agree, I like it as is.

Didn't you screw up the first puzzler? Shut yer trap.

Don't listen to him, Stu!

Yeah, take advise from the curve ruining nerd with the pocket protector and the glasses taped together.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 17, 2011, 11:29:27 PM
It should have astronomy related graphics: Saturn and its rings, comets, meteors, Planet X, etc.

I could render in stars or planets or something, but I think it looks cluttered if I do that.  Perhaps one more element that could peek out?  Unless you're suggesting a completely different design.

Agree, I like it as is.

Didn't you screw up the first puzzler? Shut yer trap.

Don't listen to him, Stu!

Yeah, take advise from the curve ruining nerd with the pocket protector and the glasses taped together.

Did I... I... I thought I hadn't posted a pic of myself.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 30, 2011, 11:27:11 AM
Here's a question as I get the next three episodes ready (headed to a conference Sept. 13-17):  I've decided I'm periodically going to do "bonus" episodes, as in episodes that are released between the 1st and 16th of the month.  My OCD wants to know if you folks think I should follow the same numbering scheme and just append it as "bonus," or if I should start a new numbering scheme like "Bonus Episode 1?"

The episodes will be of variable length and not include a puzzler.  The first one is going to be released Sept. 10/11 and probably be about 10 minutes and the second one in early October and will be closer to an hour.  The purpose is to either react to news more quickly or to point out a pseudoscientifically important date (dealing with astronomy) or something else random.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Chew on August 30, 2011, 03:02:25 PM
I'd stick with the "no bonus episode" numbering system. The SGU ran into that problem with their H1N1 Flu special episode and, iirc, it messed up their iTunes channel and Steve had to go back and re-number it as episode 234.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 30, 2011, 03:09:25 PM
I'd stick with the "no bonus episode" numbering system. The SGU ran into that problem with their H1N1 Flu special episode and, iirc, it messed up their iTunes channel and Steve had to go back and re-number it as episode 234.

Hmm.  Looking back at SGU, at least in my downloads, it goes 225, the N1N1 special, then 226.  But, I also see episode 233 and then 235.  I took a look at the RSS feed I made and I don't actually see any place where you have to explicitly give it an episode number, so I'm not sure why the SGU version ran into issues.

To be slightly more explicit, I guess technically the episodes would still be in order, but I would label them something different.  So it would be, "Episode 3: Young-Earth Creationist Comet Claims," "Episode 4 (BONUS): [not going to say yet]," "Episode 5: Rock and Dust Claims for the Apollo Moon Hoax."  OR, I could do "BONUS Episode 1" and then "Episode 4: Rock ... Hoax."  I'm thinking I'm over-thinking this and should just go with the former.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: Belgarath on August 30, 2011, 03:17:33 PM
Just go with the first one, it'll make the most sense, especially when digging back after you've made like 500 episodes....


Proud member of the 4 people who listened to the first one in a timely manner (Unlike Karl.....)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Episode 2: UFO Sightings Analyzed
Post by: astrostu on August 30, 2011, 03:20:39 PM
Just go with the first one, it'll make the most sense, especially when digging back after you've made like 500 episodes....

Proud member of the 4 people who listened to the first one in a timely manner (Unlike Karl.....)

Yeah, seriously, wazzup wit'dat?  As my Authorized North American Media Representative, he should be the FIRST to listen to my new media.  I may need to look for alternative representation here ...

But, I can happily report that he HAS now listened to the first two episodes, for he messaged me on August 23 saying he liked the music and liked the C2C clips.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on August 31, 2011, 10:59:47 PM
Episode three's up!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Chew on August 31, 2011, 11:25:05 PM
Great episode!

After you mentioned the 5% per orbit I was hoping you were going to address the 95% of 95% "compound interest" wrinkle and you did. Excellent. Although that can't be the proper metric for comets sublimating.

Shit! Missed that part where you talked about sublimation.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on August 31, 2011, 11:30:02 PM
Thanks, Chew.  And you are wicked-fast at this.  I thought I did explain sublimation, though the explanation came just before the definition -- going directly from solid to gas.  Hmm.  I did have to re-record it because I realized AFTER I recorded that I was too close to the mic and all the "b--" and "p--" words popped, so maybe I missed it the second time.

But yeah, the whole 5% versus a "few feet" REALLY gets to me, and then using those "for example" numbers to then say that they're ALL like that ... wow.  It's really one of those, "the stupid, it burns!" moments.  I mean, there are some creationist arguments - like Apollo moon hoax arguments - that seem to make sense at first and you can see where they go wrong in their thinking and understanding.  But their stuff on comets is just so ... so .... [insert bad word].
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Belgarath on September 01, 2011, 10:52:57 AM
Boo,  I'm going to have to wait and listen later tonight....
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Belgarath on September 01, 2011, 01:02:23 PM
Plus I see you made the iTunes cut.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on September 01, 2011, 01:03:43 PM
Plus I see you made the iTunes cut.
As in it's finally on iTunes?  Yup!  With three reviews so far, too.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Belgarath on September 01, 2011, 01:15:53 PM
Plus I see you made the iTunes cut.
As in it's finally on iTunes?  Yup!  With three reviews so far, too.

Just a quick note, very small, but for some reason episode 3 is not showing the time of the podcast (length)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on September 01, 2011, 01:24:23 PM
Plus I see you made the iTunes cut.
As in it's finally on iTunes?  Yup!  With three reviews so far, too.
Just a quick note, very small, but for some reason episode 3 is not showing the time of the podcast (length)
Looks like it was a typo of a comma versus a colon.  Should be fixed, but it can take time for iTunes to realize that.  It's about 25 minutes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Anders on September 01, 2011, 01:58:03 PM
I'm listening to number three now. Does that mean I'm an evil genius?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on September 01, 2011, 01:58:45 PM
I'm listening to number three now. Does that mean I'm an evil genius?
If I say "yes," does that mean you'll give me better reviews?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: Anders on September 01, 2011, 02:15:30 PM
I can make no promises at this time...  :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on September 01, 2011, 02:17:44 PM
I can make no promises at this time...  :)
Then my response is "maybe." :P
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 3: Young-Earth Creationist Claims of Comets
Post by: astrostu on September 09, 2011, 06:04:28 PM
I've posted the fourth episode (a bonus episode!) talking a little about the nonsense of Comet Elenin.  There will still be an episode for Sept. 16.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 09, 2011, 07:15:31 PM
Dammit, Stu! Too many teasers! Why can't you just make a 4 hour episode and get them out of the way???

Great episode as usual.

"Extinction Level Event Nibiru Is Near"
 :roflolmao:

How do they make this crap up?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 09, 2011, 08:27:00 PM
Steve doing his Col. Klink.  ;D

https://sites.google.com/site/chewtansy/msfn/Hoagland.wav
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 09, 2011, 10:45:01 PM
One more, with Phil Plait and the Rogues.

https://sites.google.com/site/chewtansy/msfn/HoaglandPhilandtheRogues.ogg
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: astrostu on September 10, 2011, 12:00:43 PM
Sorry to do this so soon after releasing the episode, but as of 10 seconds from now, a new version of the episode is posted.  I slightly revised the background information (added its closest approach) and I added a quip about "that's the science, folks" to the end after Hoagland's claim and before the one announcement.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 14, 2011, 08:14:26 AM
Searching for comet Elenin on youtube brings out the crazies.

This wacko has hour long videos interviewing other wackos for something called the "Andromeda Council".

Part I - Andromeda Council: Updates on Comet Elenin, brown dwarf, Nibiru, earth changes & 4-D Earth (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGeXb1gfTbE#)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: astrostu on September 14, 2011, 11:09:29 AM
Nice, Chew.  By the way, I thought I'd do a teensy bit of self-promotion at this point (that's what this thread is, right?).  In the first 60 hours after I released the Elenin episode, it had 129 downloads.  Not bad, comparable to the others if slightly more.  Then Frasier Cain of Universe Today e-mailed me that he posted about it on UT (http://www.universetoday.com/88862/exposing-pseudoastronomy-podcast-tackles-elenin-nonsense/).  In the next 14 hours, it jumped to 1339 downloads.  And this morning, 24 hrs after that, it was at 2928.

In terms of people who'll subscribe and perhaps be more permanent listeners, I think the downloads of episode 3 are more telling -- +40 yesterday morning, but +100 on that one this morning.  Most telling will be the release of episode 5 on Friday, I think.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: craig on September 14, 2011, 11:26:55 AM
Very Nice!

I think that a lot of people who download one episode will subscribe.  Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 14, 2011, 11:36:02 AM
Great news! I saw the UT link and did the Monty Burns "excellent" out loud.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Pscheptyck on September 14, 2011, 09:56:13 PM
Nice, Chew.  By the way, I thought I'd do a teensy bit of self-promotion at this point (that's what this thread is, right?).  In the first 60 hours after I released the Elenin episode, it had 129 downloads.  Not bad, comparable to the others if slightly more.  Then Frasier Cain of Universe Today e-mailed me that he posted about it on UT (http://www.universetoday.com/88862/exposing-pseudoastronomy-podcast-tackles-elenin-nonsense/).  In the next 14 hours, it jumped to 1339 downloads.  And this morning, 24 hrs after that, it was at 2928.

In terms of people who'll subscribe and perhaps be more permanent listeners, I think the downloads of episode 3 are more telling -- +40 yesterday morning, but +100 on that one this morning.  Most telling will be the release of episode 5 on Friday, I think.

I am new to the site, but I heard about your podcast from listening to the Conspiracy Skeptic and it's a very well done show. My only complaint is that they aren't long enough. It's probably not a fair complaint, but I was really getting into the info and then it's over.
I really did enjoy listening and will download the new one Friday.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: lukebourassa on September 14, 2011, 11:23:04 PM
Just downloaded the first ep. Can't wait to check it out!  :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: astrostu on September 15, 2011, 02:01:15 AM
I am new to the site, but I heard about your podcast from listening to the Conspiracy Skeptic and it's a very well done show. My only complaint is that they aren't long enough. It's probably not a fair complaint, but I was really getting into the info and then it's over.

Thanks.  I think that's a good complaint?  I mean, if you want to hear more, then you're engaged and like it. :) Here's a question, though, considering my own time constraints at the moment:  Would you rather have longer individual episodes, or would you rather have weekly as opposed to bimonthly episodes?  That asked, some topics will be longer.  Obviously the last one on Elenin, and the one before that on comets were longer.  I'm putting together an astrology one that I think will be pretty long, too.  But at the moment, I do aim for that roughly 10-20 minutes topic.

Just downloaded the first ep. Can't wait to check it out!  :)

Thanks, let me know what you think!  Though keep in mind that with the first episode we all have issues.  Listen to the first but then listen to another before making up your mind ;).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Pscheptyck on September 15, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
I am new to the site, but I heard about your podcast from listening to the Conspiracy Skeptic and it's a very well done show. My only complaint is that they aren't long enough. It's probably not a fair complaint, but I was really getting into the info and then it's over.

Thanks.  I think that's a good complaint?  I mean, if you want to hear more, then you're engaged and like it. :) Here's a question, though, considering my own time constraints at the moment:  Would you rather have longer individual episodes, or would you rather have weekly as opposed to bimonthly episodes?  That asked, some topics will be longer.  Obviously the last one on Elenin, and the one before that on comets were longer.  I'm putting together an astrology one that I think will be pretty long, too.  But at the moment, I do aim for that roughly 10-20 minutes topic.

Just downloaded the first ep. Can't wait to check it out!  :)

Thanks, let me know what you think!  Though keep in mind that with the first episode we all have issues.  Listen to the first but then listen to another before making up your mind ;).

I completely understand that you have time constraints, especially with having two jobs and all, but I am greedy. Personally, I would like a 45-60 min episode once a month and a 10-20 min episode the other episode. I would be ok with a weekly 30 min episode, but, like I said earlier, I am being greedy and I am sure your time is limited.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: astrostu on September 16, 2011, 12:17:02 AM
I completely understand that you have time constraints, especially with having two jobs and all, but I am greedy. Personally, I would like a 45-60 min episode once a month and a 10-20 min episode the other episode. I would be ok with a weekly 30 min episode, but, like I said earlier, I am being greedy and I am sure your time is limited.

I can understand wanting more.  I actually look at episodes I have planned, episodes I've hinted at, and I'm like, "Wow, by the time I get to these all, it'll be 2013!"  But really, it does take awhile to do these and I have other EPO stuff besides my normal jobs that I need to get done.  So, for the moment, all I'm promising is 2 bimonthly ~10-20 minute episodes.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: astrostu on September 16, 2011, 12:17:33 AM
And with that said, Episode 5 on "Heat and Radiation Claims of the Apollo Moon Hoax" has been posted. :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Chew on September 16, 2011, 12:20:26 AM
Puzzler: run it under cold flowing water. Water has a higher heat capacity and flowing water won't cool down like a container of water will.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: Chew on September 16, 2011, 12:45:55 AM
Good episode. The claims for the VAB has escalated over the years. First it was "too dangerous" to send astronauts through it, then it was "deadly", then, and ISYN, it will make any spacecraft traveling through it melt or explode.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: astrostu on September 16, 2011, 12:52:07 AM
Puzzler: run it under cold flowing water. Water has a higher heat capacity and flowing water won't cool down like a container of water will.
So, like, did you even listen to the episode before looking at this?  Maybe I should do what Novella threatened once, to post a fake one for the first hour. ;)  Well, anyway, I'm as usual not saying if you're right or wrong, you and others will need to wait two weeks.

Good episode. The claims for the VAB has escalated over the years. First it was "too dangerous" to send astronauts through it, then it was "deadly", then, and ISYN, it will make any spacecraft traveling through it melt or explode.
Yeah, the radiation is really one of the top two claims, I'd say.  This and the no stars, though this is by far the more difficult to explain to a lay audience.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep. 4 (BONUS): Comet Elenin Special
Post by: Pscheptyck on September 16, 2011, 06:19:17 AM
I completely understand that you have time constraints, especially with having two jobs and all, but I am greedy. Personally, I would like a 45-60 min episode once a month and a 10-20 min episode the other episode. I would be ok with a weekly 30 min episode, but, like I said earlier, I am being greedy and I am sure your time is limited.

I can understand wanting more.  I actually look at episodes I have planned, episodes I've hinted at, and I'm like, "Wow, by the time I get to these all, it'll be 2013!"  But really, it does take awhile to do these and I have other EPO stuff besides my normal jobs that I need to get done.  So, for the moment, all I'm promising is 2 bimonthly ~10-20 minute episodes.  Sorry.

Don't be sorry. Who am I to complain about free stuff? I appreciate the podcast and will be a vigilant downloader.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: Parrot on September 16, 2011, 11:26:29 AM
Small suggestion: I've found that it's best, if you're going to do some sort of crazy voice impression, to keep it at least a little bit subdued.  It never really turns out as good as you think it's going to in your mind beforehand, and if you make it too loud or screechy I think that kind of distracts from the episode a little.

I understand where you're coming from though.  I was originally going to work in all sorts of different crazy voices, but I thought it just sounded terrible.  Now I just work something like that in sparingly, and try not to go too far with it.  There are still a couple of times, though, which I'm uncertain about whether I should have done the voice.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: astrostu on September 16, 2011, 11:30:58 AM
Small suggestion: I've found that it's best, if you're going to do some sort of crazy voice impression, to keep it at least a little bit subdued.  It never really turns out as good as you think it's going to in your mind beforehand, and if you make it too loud or screechy I think that kind of distracts from the episode a little.

I understand where you're coming from though.  I was originally going to work in all sorts of different crazy voices, but I thought it just sounded terrible.  Now I just work something like that in sparingly, and try not to go too far with it.  There are still a couple of times, though, which I'm uncertain about whether I should have done the voice.
I went through three versions of that and that was the best one.  I wasn't sure whether to include it or not, I figured I was trying new things and would get feedback. :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: Parrot on September 17, 2011, 05:07:23 AM
I went through three versions of that and that was the best one.  I wasn't sure whether to include it or not, I figured I was trying new things and would get feedback. :)

Absolutely!  It's really hard to know how some aspect is going to play out with a potential audience, but you can't let yourself just be paralyzed by fear into not trying new things.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: Parrot on September 30, 2011, 06:29:15 PM
Hey, you were just plugged on The Conspiracy Skeptic podcast.  Nigel St. Whitehall had some very complimentary things to say about you.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: astrostu on September 30, 2011, 06:58:30 PM
Hey, you were just plugged on The Conspiracy Skeptic podcast.  Nigel St. Whitehall had some very complimentary things to say about you.
Yupyup.  1 hr 15 minutes into the episode,  I've already messaged him on Facebook to let him know his check is in the mail. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: astrostu on September 30, 2011, 11:31:54 PM
Episode 6 is now posted:  Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_006.php).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 5: Heat & Radiation Claims, Apollo Moon Hoax
Post by: Belgarath on September 30, 2011, 11:37:39 PM
Episode 6 is now posted:  Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky (http://podcast.sjrdesgin.net/shownotes_006.php).

Boo!  Server not found.....
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: astrostu on September 30, 2011, 11:39:30 PM
Episode 6 is now posted:  Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky (http://podcast.sjrdesgin.net/shownotes_006.php).
Boo!  Server not found.....
That was a test to see if anyone clicked the link. ;)  Yeah ... spelling mistake; works now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Chew on October 01, 2011, 10:18:10 AM
Puzzler: Venus enters retrograde motion and appears to do so in Orion as viewed from Earth. Rare because it only happens once per synodical period, i.e. once every 19 months.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 01, 2011, 10:26:22 AM
Really interesting puzzler.  I consulted with my wife, she used to be an astrologer before she became disillusioned with the practice.  She was never a professional astrologer, she didn't give readings for money, but she knows all about how to do a chart and we still have tons of astrology books.

She was very confused by the puzzler.  She thinks that the "planetary loop" might be referring to the "transit" of Venus.  But she has no idea about Orion, apparently they didn't talk much about that constellation in astrology circles.

Her guess is that because Venus' orbit is on a slightly different plane than ours, perhaps Venus dipped closer to Orion than usual as it was transiting the other constellations.

If that's right, all the credit goes to her.

She did mention an interesting note about how Venus is going to transit the Sun on June 5 2012, which won't happen again until 2117.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Chew on October 01, 2011, 10:42:09 AM
Wikipedia has a decent article about Apparent retrograde motion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 01, 2011, 11:03:30 AM
Wikipedia has a decent article about Apparent retrograde motion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)

But would that be called a "planetary loop"?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Belgarath on October 01, 2011, 11:06:16 AM
Wikipedia has a decent article about Apparent retrograde motion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)

But would that be called a "planetary loop"?

By an astrologer?  Certainly, that's what it looks like.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Chew on October 01, 2011, 11:56:56 AM
Wikipedia has a decent article about Apparent retrograde motion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)

But would that be called a "planetary loop"?

Yes. Click on the last picture in the link. It will show Mars making a loop during its apparent retrograde motion. Due to the planets' inclination to the ecliptic and where in relation to the Earth the other planet is they will sometimes draw a loop, sometimes they draw a zigzag.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 01, 2011, 12:39:07 PM
Wikipedia has a decent article about Apparent retrograde motion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_retrograde_motion)

But would that be called a "planetary loop"?

Yes. Click on the last picture in the link. It will show Mars making a loop during its apparent retrograde motion. Due to the planets' inclination to the ecliptic and where in relation to the Earth the other planet is they will sometimes draw a loop, sometimes they draw a zigzag.

Interesting.  My wife didn't even realize that there were different interpretations for different types of retrograde based on what constellations may be in the general vicinity.  Sounds like some stuff from pretty deep down the rabbit hole.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: IrishJazz on October 01, 2011, 03:08:21 PM
Like the podcast.... not too sure about the if the moon was a cube discussion.  Much more interesting- what if the moon were an irregular swarm of rapidly rotating donuts. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Belgarath on October 01, 2011, 04:24:32 PM
Like the podcast.... not too sure about the if the moon was a cube discussion.  Much more interesting- what if the moon were an irregular swarm of rapidly rotating donuts.

Forbidden Donut (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40uWrNHC7zE#)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 01, 2011, 05:17:19 PM
I've got an interesting quote from The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, illustrating that objects light years away can have an impact on local events.  But only cumulatively, and not in a way that can be predicted. 

Quote from: Nassim Nicholas Taleb
   This multiplicative difficulty leading to the need for greater and greater precision in assumptions can be illustrated with the following simple exercise concerning the prediction of the movements of billiard balls on a table. I use the example as computed by the mathematician Michael Berry. If you know a set of basic parameters concerning the ball at rest, can compute the resistance of the table (quite elementary), and can gauge the strength of the impact, then it is rather easy to predict what would happen at the first hit. The second impact becomes more complicated, but possible; you need to be more careful about your knowledge of the initial states, and more precision is called for. The problem is that to correctly compute the ninth impact, you need to take into account the gravitational pull of someone standing next to the table (modestly, Berry’s computations use a weight of less than 150 pounds). And to compute the fifty-sixth impact, every single elementary particle of the universe needs to be present in your assumptions! An electron at the edge of the universe, separated from us by 10 billion light-years, must figure in the calculations, since it exerts a meaningful effect on the outcome.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: IrishJazz on October 01, 2011, 05:26:56 PM
I've got an interesting quote from The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, illustrating that objects light years away can have an impact on local events.  But only cumulatively, and not in a way that can be predicted. 

Quote from: Nassim Nicholas Taleb
   This multiplicative difficulty leading to the need for greater and greater precision in assumptions can be illustrated with the following simple exercise concerning the prediction of the movements of billiard balls on a table. I use the example as computed by the mathematician Michael Berry. If you know a set of basic parameters concerning the ball at rest, can compute the resistance of the table (quite elementary), and can gauge the strength of the impact, then it is rather easy to predict what would happen at the first hit. The second impact becomes more complicated, but possible; you need to be more careful about your knowledge of the initial states, and more precision is called for. The problem is that to correctly compute the ninth impact, you need to take into account the gravitational pull of someone standing next to the table (modestly, Berry’s computations use a weight of less than 150 pounds). And to compute the fifty-sixth impact, every single elementary particle of the universe needs to be present in your assumptions! An electron at the edge of the universe, separated from us by 10 billion light-years, must figure in the calculations, since it exerts a meaningful effect on the outcome.

Nicholas Taleb is an interesting and intelligent guy who made his reputation consistently losing by betting against the market until he was right.  He is one of the most brilliant broken watches on the planet.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: astrostu on October 01, 2011, 11:46:51 PM
I've got an interesting quote from The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, illustrating that objects light years away can have an impact on local events.  But only cumulatively, and not in a way that can be predicted. 

Quote from: Nassim Nicholas Taleb
   This multiplicative difficulty leading to the need for greater and greater precision in assumptions can be illustrated with the following simple exercise concerning the prediction of the movements of billiard balls on a table. I use the example as computed by the mathematician Michael Berry. If you know a set of basic parameters concerning the ball at rest, can compute the resistance of the table (quite elementary), and can gauge the strength of the impact, then it is rather easy to predict what would happen at the first hit. The second impact becomes more complicated, but possible; you need to be more careful about your knowledge of the initial states, and more precision is called for. The problem is that to correctly compute the ninth impact, you need to take into account the gravitational pull of someone standing next to the table (modestly, Berry’s computations use a weight of less than 150 pounds). And to compute the fifty-sixth impact, every single elementary particle of the universe needs to be present in your assumptions! An electron at the edge of the universe, separated from us by 10 billion light-years, must figure in the calculations, since it exerts a meaningful effect on the outcome.

I'm fairly darn sure that this is just plain wrong.  You can do quick order-of-magnitude calculations about the forces involved here and I would not be surprised if the impact on one ball to the next was several powers of 10 more than the gravitational pull from someone standing next to the table.  It doesn't matter if it's the first bounce or the 10th.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 02, 2011, 12:22:51 AM
I'm fairly darn sure that this is just plain wrong.  You can do quick order-of-magnitude calculations about the forces involved here and I would not be surprised if the impact on one ball to the next was several powers of 10 more than the gravitational pull from someone standing next to the table.  It doesn't matter if it's the first bounce or the 10th.

My understanding is that this is about cumulative effects.  Similar to the way a butterfly on the other side of the world can affect weather patterns.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Belgarath on October 02, 2011, 12:25:57 AM
I was going to say it slightly differently.

If it's truly gravitational force, then it's obvious astrology CAN'T work because the astrologers CERTAINLY do not take into account all of the people moving in the vicinity of the person.  I haven't figured it out exactly, but the gravitational pull of a person or a car or an airplane must dwarf the gravitational force of Uranus on the subject and NO astrologer takes that into account.

And then, why the hell would it matter what sign you were born under?

ETA:  Well, the butterfly effect says that beyond a certain point, you CAN'T predict what will happen, the system is chaotic, therefore if that is their base assumption, then astrology CAN'T work.... Again...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: astrostu on October 02, 2011, 02:37:13 AM
As Belgarath said, though slightly differently, there's a difference between butterflies flapping their wings causing wind in Africa that builds into a storm over New York and a billiard ball game.  The billiard game is a much more contained system and can be predicted by basic introductory physics.  Effects of air, gravity from people around it, etc. are negligible.  Even after 10 bounces.  Effects of a slightly non-uniform surface of the table will be larger.

When you talk about weather, you delve much more into chaos theory because it's such a large system made of so many particles that are much more uniform (one air molecule versus another, or if you'd rather, 1 cc of air vs. another).  So if I exhale, that air current will have much less predictable effects on the system around it because there are so many similarly sized particles involved.

At least, that's my understanding of the difference.  It's like going from billiard with 15 balls on a table that's 100x the size of a ball to playing with millions of balls on a table a gagillion times larger.  You're not going to be able to predict that outcome very easily.

And Belgarath -- I actually did do the calculation in prep for the podcast episode, but I decided not to put it in.  The standard saying is that "the delivery room nurse has a much larger gravitational effect on you than the moon."  It's actually not true.  Yes, she has a larger effect than Neptune, but not the moon, not the sun.  Now, if you go to TIDAL effects, she has a bigger effect since instead of it going as the inverse-square of the distance, tides are inverse-cube.


It's also "too bad" that I put this episode out when I did.  Coast to Coast just had an astrologer on last night (Sept. 30) that I was listening to earlier today while doing some work. And ... wow.  He was huge on the "BUT IT WORKS!!" angle, and he was saying all sorts of things like, "because Pluto was demoted, we've all turned against the things that Pluto rules like sharing, which is why the Republicans and Tea Party want to get rid of entitlement programs."  And "Pluto was discovered in 1930 which brought on all of FDR's sharing programs, like Social Security."  Apparently, objects don't effect us if we don't know about them? And how we decide to classify them matters?

I've tucked it aside in case I ever do a random astrology clip "WTF" episode.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Parrot on October 02, 2011, 10:04:15 AM
Well, it makes sense to me that effects that are negligible can have a cumulative impact as the iterations build up.  That's the basis of chaos theory.  But I'm not a mathematician.  Perhaps the mathematician Taleb got his source material from, Michael Berry, has explained his reasoning in a way that makes more sense to you.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Belgarath on October 02, 2011, 10:59:58 AM
And Belgarath -- I actually did do the calculation in prep for the podcast episode, but I decided not to put it in.  The standard saying is that "the delivery room nurse has a much larger gravitational effect on you than the moon."  It's actually not true.  Yes, she has a larger effect than Neptune, but not the moon, not the sun.  Now, if you go to TIDAL effects, she has a bigger effect since instead of it going as the inverse-square of the distance, tides are inverse-cube.



Cool, I figured that the moon and or the sun might be a bit bigger (but I'm to lazy to pull out my formulas and do it, so thanks!  Did you figure out the break point?  Does the delivery room nurse have more of an effect than say Jupiter?  Mars?  Venus?

I'm guessing that it's possible that Mars or Venus may change from bigger to smaller potentially based on how close they are to earth. 

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: astrostu on October 02, 2011, 04:56:52 PM
Alright, I did the math over again, assuming the nurse is a portly 80 kg and stands about 3 meters away from the 5 kg overweight child.  I did a minimum and maximum distance for the planets from Earth.  Everything is a larger gravitational effect than the nurse except Neptune, Mars when it's on the other side of the sun, and Mercury when it's on the other side of the sun.  If the nurse moves a meter closer, then (s)he is a stronger force than Uranus, too.

If there's a 2-metric-tonne machine nearby, that gravity is also stronger than Mercury regardless, Venus when it's on the other side of the sun, and Uranus regardless.  It's almost as big a pull as Saturn when it's on the other side of the sun.

If you were born next to either World Trade Tower (within a quarter mile), then the mass of either one of those is a greater gravitational pull then everything except the moon or the sun.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy 'Cast Ep 6: Astrology Basics and a (Non-?)Changing Sky
Post by: Belgarath on October 02, 2011, 06:00:06 PM
Alright, I did the math over again, assuming the nurse is a portly 80 kg and stands about 3 meters away from the 5 kg overweight child.  I did a minimum and maximum distance for the planets from Earth.  Everything is a larger gravitational effect than the nurse except Neptune, Mars when it's on the other side of the sun, and Mercury when it's on the other side of the sun.  If the nurse moves a meter closer, then (s)he is a stronger force than Uranus, too.

If there's a 2-metric-tonne machine nearby, that gravity is also stronger than Mercury regardless, Venus when it's on the other side of the sun, and Uranus regardless.  It's almost as big a pull as Saturn when it's on the other side of the sun.

If you were born next to either World Trade Tower (within a quarter mile), then the mass of either one of those is a greater gravitational pull then everything except the moon or the sun.

Cool.  Nerd curiosity satisfied.  Does this mean that my horoscope was completely screwed up on 9/11?  Wait, don't go there, they'll use that next

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: astrostu on October 09, 2011, 01:47:33 PM
Episode 7 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_007.php) is up!  It's another "bonus" episode, and it is just under an hour long.  It's a live recording of my talk on the Apollo Moon Hoax at Skepticamp in Colorado Springs back in August.  I've gotten requests for the audio and so thought this was a good venue to get it out.  Unfortunately, half the claims are photographic and it's not a vodcast.  But you'll get the idea.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: Belgarath on October 09, 2011, 01:49:46 PM
Episode 7 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_007.php) is up!  It's another "bonus" episode, and it is just under an hour long.  It's a live recording of my talk on the Apollo Moon Hoax at Skepticamp in Colorado Springs back in August.  I've gotten requests for the audio and so thought this was a good venue to get it out.  Unfortunately, half the claims are photographic and it's not a vodcast.  But you'll get the idea.

Woot!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: seaotter on October 09, 2011, 01:54:56 PM
Episode 7 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_007.php) is up!  It's another "bonus" episode, and it is just under an hour long.  It's a live recording of my talk on the Apollo Moon Hoax at Skepticamp in Colorado Springs back in August.  I've gotten requests for the audio and so thought this was a good venue to get it out.  Unfortunately, half the claims are photographic and it's not a vodcast.  But you'll get the idea.

Woot!

Woot Woot! This is rapidly getting to the top of my rabid anticipation list!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: astrostu on October 09, 2011, 01:56:49 PM
Woot Woot! This is rapidly getting to the top of my rabid anticipation list!

Rabid as in it's a disease and you're worried it's spreading, or rabid in that you're looking forward to it? ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: astrostu on October 13, 2011, 02:09:35 PM
Special episode preview:  Phil Plait's agreed to be a guest interview, probably sometime in December.  I told him that I would like to focus somewhat on his idea of "the final epsilon" (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/with-relativity-and-quantum-mechanics-is-newtonian-mechanics-irrelevant/) in skepticism -- when in normal skepticism can we say something is complete bunk versus what we can legitimately say as scientists (in science, we can never prove anything).

I don't want to overstay my good will with him so I don't know how long the interview will last, but does anyone have another topic you'd like me to ask him about, too?

Oh, and I'm also going to try to line up Pamela Gay for some time close to January or February about her approach to astronomy education and public outreach - another topic I think very relevant to my podcast, since, well, it is EPO.

These will be released as "bonus" episodes.  I think I'm going to keep to that format -- regular episodes on the 1st and 16th of the month will still be focused topics, as I've been doing (somewhat modeled from Skeptoid), and extra stuff I'm interested in putting out, or timely focused episodes like Elenin, will be "bonus" ones that come out whenever I get them done and will be of completely variable length.

I've also lined up a Mayan scholar for an interview to come out hopefully early November who's going to talk about the calendar system and what the Mayans "really said" about 2012 (Nov. is going to be an intro to 2012 month ... yeah, didn't quite plan that right; I may try to move Phil to November and the 2012 stuff to December).

[sheepish grin]And I'll admit that I'm hoping they tell people they're on my 'cast to help get the word out about it .... [/sheepish grin]
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: Belgarath on October 13, 2011, 02:12:33 PM
There is a coup.  Nice work Stu.

I'll ponder it, I'd probably want to ask Phil a ton of stuff.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: seaotter on October 13, 2011, 07:42:17 PM
Cool
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 7: Apollo Moon Hoax Live Talk (BONUS)
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 02:25:50 AM
Episode 8 on the hollow Earth has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_008.php)  It is by far the longest episode, excluding the live talk bonus episode.  Lots of Coast to Coast clips.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Parrot on October 16, 2011, 01:00:42 PM
I read about people who believed the Earth was hollow in Martin Gardner's "Fads And Fallacies In The Name Of Science".

That was written in 1952 though, and I never hear about it in modern skeptical material.  I kind of thought that the belief faded away. 

I'm looking forward to hearing about this!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Parrot on October 16, 2011, 02:12:29 PM
Starting to see how time consuming it is to put out a substantial-length monologue podcast eh?  ;)

Regarding the puzzler, I'm going to have to just guess on this one.  I certainly don't think that the force would be equal enough all around to form anything resembling a sphere.  If it did form some kind of hollow interior, I'm guessing it's shape would be more like a cat's eye: slit-like.

But I don't think it would actually form a hollow interior.  My guess is that it would still be mostly solid, just some areas will be more compressed and dense than others.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 16, 2011, 04:50:41 PM
My guess is an hollow ellipsoid would form with the long axis near the sphere's equator.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 05:06:02 PM
Starting to see how time consuming it is to put out a substantial-length monologue podcast eh?  ;)
I wrote, recorded, edited, and posted that episode in the space of 10 hours with two one-hour breaks yesterday.  I was a bit behind ... I normally like to do these a few days before rather than 12 hours before.  Though I started listening to and taking notes on the C2C clips just after I put the last (Oct 1) episode out.  And I was impressed: I got through an entire 7 minutes in one take!

My guess is an hollow ellipsoid would form with the long axis near the sphere's equator.
Triaxial or biaxial?  Tri and you have a long and medium axis you need to orient.  Not saying that's right, just saying you need to clarify ;).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 16, 2011, 05:11:12 PM
Actually, I think it would be a very flattened oblate spheroid since two of the axis would be equal length.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 05:20:02 PM
Actually, I think it would be a very flattened oblate spheroid since two of the axis would be equal length.

oblate spheroid : biaxial ellipse :: po-TAY-to : po-TAH-to
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 16, 2011, 05:26:06 PM
Actually, I think it would be a very flattened oblate spheroid since two of the axis would be equal length.

oblate spheroid : biaxial ellipse :: po-TAY-to : po-TAH-to

Oh, is that what biaxial meant?

Some large telescope mirrors are formed by rotating vats filled with molten glass and allowed to cool and the result is called a paraboloid. The pull of gravity is in one direction though, so I don't think the shapes would match. What do you call two paraboloids stuck together on their lips?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 05:30:13 PM
Actually, I think it would be a very flattened oblate spheroid since two of the axis would be equal length.

oblate spheroid : biaxial ellipse :: po-TAY-to : po-TAH-to

Oh, is that what biaxial meant?

Some large telescope mirrors are formed by rotating vats filled with molten glass and allowed to cool and the result is called a paraboloid. The pull of gravity is in one direction though, so I don't think the shapes would match. What do you call two paraboloids stuck together on their lips?

Two half paraboloids?  Biaxial ellipse is where you have an ellipse but two axes are the same, so that's why I thought that's what you meant by oblate spheroid.  A hemisphere of a biaxial ellipse is somewhat similar to a wide open paraboloid, but the shapes are different, and the volumes are different.  Which do you think it'd take on?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 16, 2011, 06:11:31 PM
Actually, I think it would be a very flattened oblate spheroid since two of the axis would be equal length.

oblate spheroid : biaxial ellipse :: po-TAY-to : po-TAH-to

Oh, is that what biaxial meant?

Some large telescope mirrors are formed by rotating vats filled with molten glass and allowed to cool and the result is called a paraboloid. The pull of gravity is in one direction though, so I don't think the shapes would match. What do you call two paraboloids stuck together on their lips?

Two half paraboloids?  Biaxial ellipse is where you have an ellipse but two axes are the same, so that's why I thought that's what you meant by oblate spheroid.  A hemisphere of a biaxial ellipse is somewhat similar to a wide open paraboloid, but the shapes are different, and the volumes are different.  Which do you think it'd take on?

Neither! I'm changing my vote to a prolate spheroid! If I keep changing my mind I'll get it right sooner or later.

The long axis should be parallel to the solid sphere's axis of rotation because there would be very little centrifugal force at the poles.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Parrot on October 16, 2011, 06:51:45 PM
Starting to see how time consuming it is to put out a substantial-length monologue podcast eh?  ;)
I wrote, recorded, edited, and posted that episode in the space of 10 hours with two one-hour breaks yesterday.  I was a bit behind ... I normally like to do these a few days before rather than 12 hours before.  Though I started listening to and taking notes on the C2C clips just after I put the last (Oct 1) episode out.  And I was impressed: I got through an entire 7 minutes in one take!

That beats my record!  I think I've gotten around 5 minutes in one take before.

As a general rule, it takes me about an hour to record 10 minutes.  I've never timed my writing, but I know that can be very time consuming as well.  Plus editing what you wrote, locating the proper sound clips, and all that other fun stuff.  So 8 hours to put together a 37 minute show from scratch I think is pretty good.

I'm in the writing phase of my next episode right now.  I've got most of the introduction section done, and I've got some really interesting comments to read out.  And the main section is something that I've already written, I just need to edit it so it makes sense as a podcast.

Trying to find time to finish the writing a little at a time, hopefully this will all come together before too long.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 07:46:59 PM
Starting to see how time consuming it is to put out a substantial-length monologue podcast eh?  ;)
I wrote, recorded, edited, and posted that episode in the space of 10 hours with two one-hour breaks yesterday.  I was a bit behind ... I normally like to do these a few days before rather than 12 hours before.  Though I started listening to and taking notes on the C2C clips just after I put the last (Oct 1) episode out.  And I was impressed: I got through an entire 7 minutes in one take!

That beats my record!  I think I've gotten around 5 minutes in one take before.

As a general rule, it takes me about an hour to record 10 minutes.  I've never timed my writing, but I know that can be very time consuming as well.  Plus editing what you wrote, locating the proper sound clips, and all that other fun stuff.  So 8 hours to put together a 37 minute show from scratch I think is pretty good.

I'm in the writing phase of my next episode right now.  I've got most of the introduction section done, and I've got some really interesting comments to read out.  And the main section is something that I've already written, I just need to edit it so it makes sense as a podcast.

Trying to find time to finish the writing a little at a time, hopefully this will all come together before too long.

Yeah, it's annoying doing so many takes, needing to stop and delete what you just said and say it over again and you still mess up and you delete and say it over again and still mess up .... sigh.

I don't actually edit what I write.  I just write it the way I write my blog.  Hmm.  Maybe that's why I have a steady readership of only 200-400 hits a day?  And as I said, I had already figured out where the clips were I wanted.  I just had to go back and clip 'em out and weed through the multiple ones about the same thing (like in this one EVERYONE talked about the earthquake data (wrongly), so I selected the "best" one; same with the Admiral Byrd story - George introduced EVERY episode with that, and I listened to 5 C2C Hollow Earth episodes (10ish hrs)).

What took me the longest to write in this episode was actually the math on the density stuff.  I kept getting a mass for Earth that was too small by about a factor of 3.  Took me 20 minutes to figure out I forgot to square pi.

Speaking of which - when you folks (all y'all) listen to this one, let me know about the math.  I really don't want all this to be a math lesson and it's especially hard to follow math when you're just listening to it.  Was I clear?  Would there have been a better way to explain it?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Parrot on October 16, 2011, 07:55:59 PM
Yeah, it's annoying doing so many takes, needing to stop and delete what you just said and say it over again and you still mess up and you delete and say it over again and still mess up .... sigh.

I don't actually edit what I write.  I just write it the way I write my blog.  Hmm.  Maybe that's why I have a steady readership of only 200-400 hits a day?

Actually, it's the same for me.  But if often happens as I'm in the middle of recording an episode that I make edits on the fly because I think of a better way of saying something, or it suddenly hits me that something I wrote is particularly awkward.  That takes time that can add up.

And as I said, I had already figured out where the clips were I wanted.  I just had to go back and clip 'em out and weed through the multiple ones about the same thing (like in this one EVERYONE talked about the earthquake data (wrongly), so I selected the "best" one; same with the Admiral Byrd story - George introduced EVERY episode with that, and I listened to 5 C2C Hollow Earth episodes (10ish hrs)).

It's a hassle, though, to have to listen through it and mark down the time for each clip so you can properly cut out the audio, isn't it?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 16, 2011, 08:00:43 PM
Yeah, it's annoying doing so many takes, needing to stop and delete what you just said and say it over again and you still mess up and you delete and say it over again and still mess up .... sigh.

I don't actually edit what I write.  I just write it the way I write my blog.  Hmm.  Maybe that's why I have a steady readership of only 200-400 hits a day?

Actually, it's the same for me.  But if often happens as I'm in the middle of recording an episode that I make edits on the fly because I think of a better way of saying something, or it suddenly hits me that something I wrote is particularly awkward.  That takes time that can add up.
I actually do do this occasionally.  But not too often so it doesn't take that much time.

And as I said, I had already figured out where the clips were I wanted.  I just had to go back and clip 'em out and weed through the multiple ones about the same thing (like in this one EVERYONE talked about the earthquake data (wrongly), so I selected the "best" one; same with the Admiral Byrd story - George introduced EVERY episode with that, and I listened to 5 C2C Hollow Earth episodes (10ish hrs)).

It's a hassle, though, to have to listen through it and mark down the time for each clip so you can properly cut out the audio, isn't it?
I listen to it while I do my work, and the actual clips I want to use are infrequent enough that it's not a big distraction to occasionally pause, record the time stamp, a few words about what it was, and continue with work.  Cutting the clips out and getting the exact cuts I want takes me maybe 1-2 minutes plus however long the clip is (since I listen to it again to make sure I got what I wanted).  So with the ones in this last episode, doing all the cutting took maybe 20 minutes for 'em.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 16, 2011, 08:19:26 PM
Speaking of which - when you folks (all y'all) listen to this one, let me know about the math.  I really don't want all this to be a math lesson and it's especially hard to follow math when you're just listening to it.  Was I clear?  Would there have been a better way to explain it?

I enjoyed the math but then again I enjoy math.

If you want to condense it just say "plugging the numbers into the appropriate geometric formulae we know..."

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 17, 2011, 03:10:33 PM
Thought I'd mention that I got confirmation this morning that Pamela Gay's agreed to come on for a discussion about her approach to education and public outreach.  Probably some time in January (a project we're working on is launching Jan. 1, so just after that is a fairly apropos time).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: riptor on October 17, 2011, 05:42:33 PM
Great episode on the Hollow Earth.  I'm surprised that there are still people who believe in it, but I'm not surprised that they would appear on Coast to Coast.  A great book on the history of the hollow earth belief is Hollow Earth by David Standish.  Not only does he cover the real life believers of a hollow earth, but the times the idea appears in fiction as well.  The podcast mentions Halley as a learned man who believed the earth to be hollow, but he wasn't the only one.  Others around the the time of Halley published books that claimed the hollow earth was filled with fire (hence volcanoes) or water (where the water for the Great Flood came from and eventually seeped back into.)  So for the time Halley wasn't saying anything that was too outlandish, but the rotating interior spheres was a bit different than what the other hollow earthers thought at the time.

Also, I'm looking forward to an episode on the flat earth now.  ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 17, 2011, 06:09:44 PM
Thanks, riptor.  There's definitely a lot more history I could have gone into with the hollow Earth, but I wanted to really cut to the chase and get into the claims people make.  That's why I tried to touch on what I thought were the key people and then get right on wit' it.

And yes, a flat earth episode is planned for some point in the future.  Though I should mention that, at 2 episodes a month, I have stuff already scheduled out through Feb. 2012 with unscheduled topics that I want to cover well into 2013.  Definitely don't have a shortage of topics, though priority is being given (after 2011) to ones that people are requesting.

Here's another general question to the board:  What do you think about adding a Q&A segment?  I got an e-mail today from someone requesting I address listener question(s) at some point in the episode, I guess kinda like AstronomyCast used to do except they made an entire episode about it.  I'd also slightly re-arrange the show format to be:  Intro, Topic, Q&A, Feedback, Puzzler, Announcements, End.  Preferably the question I address would be specific to some sort of claim someone's heard (so related to pseudoscience), but I'm willing to relax that (this guy's question was how we tell types of supernovae apart).

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 17, 2011, 06:15:43 PM
A Q&A section would be a great addition.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: seaotter on October 17, 2011, 06:16:57 PM
A Q&A section would be a great addition.

This
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 18, 2011, 01:56:39 PM
Earlier I mentioned some telescope mirrors have been made by spinning a vat of molten glass to form the parabolic shape. Reading about ROSAT re-entering I stumbled across an article about Liquid Mirror Telescopes!

There's a Wikipedia article for Liquid mirror telescopes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_mirror_telescopes)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 18, 2011, 02:02:20 PM
Liquid mirrors are cool, but they can only see things at zenith.  I can't wait for the conspiracy theorists to start on with that.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Chew on October 18, 2011, 03:52:05 PM
Liquid mirrors are cool, but they can only see things at zenith.  I can't wait for the conspiracy theorists to start on with that.

A conspiracy about a zenith-only-looking telescope? What possible con-

Never mind. You're right, of course. They can hatch a conspiracy about anything.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 18, 2011, 03:53:22 PM
Liquid mirrors are cool, but they can only see things at zenith.  I can't wait for the conspiracy theorists to start on with that.

A conspiracy about a zenith-only-looking telescope? What possible con-

Never mind. You're right, of course. They can hatch a conspiracy about anything.

The fact that the claim STILL persists of "why haven't they taken a picture of the Apollo landing sites" ... sigh.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Nene on October 19, 2011, 04:10:07 AM
Stu, after two months of conferences and only half-decent Internet connections, I finally came about to listening to your podcast, and think it is fantastic. Love to format, I don't care much for the length, though the longer the better.  ;)

There was only one thing, a little pet peeve of mine. bremsstrahlung radiation, I can understand that you have said it this way to show that bremsstrahlung is a radiation. But I have spent a year at UT Austin trying to hammer into undergrads that saying bremsstrahlung radiation is too much of the same thing. Though I have to admit, that I like the fact that some of the German Physics traditions have survived.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 31, 2011, 01:41:04 AM
The celluloid is littering the floor, but episode 9 has been recorded and edited.  Should be up in very roughly 24 hours.  Looking forward, you can expect 4 episodes in both November and December, though three of those eight will be interviews/discussions.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Nene on October 31, 2011, 03:58:49 AM
You just made this very horrible Monday morning so much better.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 31, 2011, 03:59:50 AM
You just made this very horrible Monday morning so much better.
Aww. :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Nene on October 31, 2011, 04:06:19 AM
You just made this very horrible Monday morning so much better.
Aww. :)

I have said it before you were one of my favorite guest on the conspiracy skeptic and I really like your podcast.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 31, 2011, 04:08:03 AM
You just made this very horrible Monday morning so much better.
Aww. :)
I have said it before you were one of my favorite guest on the conspiracy skeptic and I really like your podcast.
Thanks much.  That does mean a lot. :) And that's too bad about a horrible Monday.  Mine is only 2 hours old and I need to go to bed ....
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: Nene on October 31, 2011, 04:19:32 AM
You just made this very horrible Monday morning so much better.
Aww. :)
I have said it before you were one of my favorite guest on the conspiracy skeptic and I really like your podcast.
Thanks much.  That does mean a lot. :) And that's too bad about a horrible Monday.  Mine is only 2 hours old and I need to go to bed ....

Well I am already at work awaiting my first two students, applicants for the BSc thesis.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 8: The Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on October 31, 2011, 09:37:35 PM
Episode 9 is up! (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_009.php)

I tried a few new things this episode.  First, there's the new Q&A.  Second, there's my attempt at a few joking sound effects and voice modification.  And then there's the bit of re-organization.  The order now is:  Intro, Main Segment, Q&A, Feedback, Puzzler, Announcements, Outro.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Ravenhull on November 01, 2011, 11:01:52 AM
Re: The Puzzler

My first thought is that, assuming that you were at the effective magnetic north, and that the needle were perfectly balanced, then it would point towards the ground.  But, I cannot be sure that the pull would be strong enough to counter the weight of the 'south' end of the needle.  This would be reversed at the South magnetic pole.

That said, based on the standard, and of course exagerated, illustration of Earth magnetic lines, I wonder if there might be an effective null area at that point, with the needle trying to point to where the magnetic lines plunge down around the area.  Unfortunately, my knowledge of magnetic mechanics is not good enough to know for sure.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Chew on November 01, 2011, 11:18:10 AM
Great episode!

Except Ravenhull beat me to the answer.  :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Belgarath on November 01, 2011, 12:22:37 PM
Ugh, I should have listened to this last night!  I assume the puzzler involved a common situation we encounter in aviation.  It's called 'magnetic dip' and is a bugger for figuring out how to do turns using only a magnetic compass.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 01, 2011, 12:27:40 PM
Chew, Ravenhull only beat you if you accept that as the correct answer. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Belgarath on November 01, 2011, 12:33:11 PM
Chew, Ravenhull only beat you if you accept that as the correct answer. ;)

Ohh.  So I still  have a chance!  To the Bat-phone-podcast-listener-thingie........
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 01, 2011, 12:35:05 PM
My response to Chew should not be construed as either a "yes," "no," nor "partially" in response to Ravenhull's posted answer. :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Belgarath on November 01, 2011, 12:38:21 PM
My response to Chew should not be construed as either a "yes," "no," nor "partially" in response to Ravenhull's posted answer. :D

So you're sayin there's a chance!!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 01, 2011, 12:40:41 PM
I'm saying there's as much chance as Schrödinger's cat of being alive.  Or dead.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Ravenhull on November 01, 2011, 12:53:18 PM
Well, it ain't unheard of for me to be utterly wrong. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Chew on November 01, 2011, 02:13:51 PM
The magnetic poles are defined as the area where the magnetic lines of force enter and exit perpendicular to the surface. So the proper end of the needle would point straight down.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Ravenhull on November 01, 2011, 03:08:32 PM
Yes, but by that point, most of the 'lines' have already made their mad plunge to the pole, leaving few there, which is why I was thinking on the idea that it might be a near null zone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geomagnetisme.svg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geomagnetisme.svg)

I'm still leaning towards the most likely answer being that the needle would point down, but as I said, I am no expert in the field.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Belgarath on November 01, 2011, 05:28:19 PM
I have some such to say on this.  As soon as I put my thoughts together, I'll post.  Well, I need to go finish potting some plants, then answer some e-mail, then put thoughts together then post.  So it'll be a bit....

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 04, 2011, 01:27:41 AM
I'm headed back to Ohio for Thanksgiving in a few weeks, and I'm going to be guest-talking in at least one middle school math class, possibly some science classes.  I'd like to have business cards for the 'cast to hand out should there be any requests by the students (with the okay from the teacher) and to hand out to a few former teachers I'm going to visit.  I've gone through two iterations and have a few ideas.  But, I'm not really happy with any of them, though, and I'd like feedback.  I'm not really set on any of the designs, but I think it makes sense to include the album art from the podcast.

Version 1.0 is just the logo and the URL.  1.1a adds in some text describing it a bit, and 1.1b flips the elements.  For 1.2 I re-mastered the album art to business card proportions and added the URL.  They are very roughly the size they will print, perhaps slightly larger, depending upon the ppi of your screen (I set these at 150).

I'd have these printed glossy on one side, nothing on the other.

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/businesscards/card.v.1.0.jpg)

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/businesscards/card.v.1.1a.jpg)

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/businesscards/card.v.1.1b.jpg)

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/businesscards/card.v.1.2.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 05, 2011, 04:43:09 PM
Hmm.  Anyone?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: seaotter on November 05, 2011, 04:53:10 PM
I like the last one, but I'd put the bullet list inside the doorway.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Chew on November 05, 2011, 04:56:26 PM
I vote for the 3rd one.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 05, 2011, 04:58:21 PM
Thought I would add in the comments from my Aunt; I had said I liked the last one more than the others, to which she responded:

Quote
That one looks more empty than the others. I like the 2nd one, but I would use a sans serif typeface because those thin lines in the serif font you have now might not print well. With a sans serif font there is no thick and thin- it will print better and be easier to read. Maybe "shedding light on" works better than "shed light on".

(Note that I disagree with her on the last one looking "empty.")

I'd like to get a bit more input before I decide, but I think I need to order this weekend for them to arrive before I leave.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: Belgarath on November 05, 2011, 07:42:40 PM
I'm with Chew.  I like the third one too.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 06, 2011, 06:12:32 PM
Alright, by "popular" vote, here's the one I'm planning to send off to the printer:

(http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/businesscards/card.v.1.3b.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: seaotter on November 06, 2011, 06:26:50 PM
You will rue the day sir!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 06, 2011, 06:28:08 PM
You will rue the day sir!
I like the last one, too. ;)  But it's 3 against 2.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 07, 2011, 07:40:04 PM
Episode 10 is recorded and will be released November 10, coinciding with the anniversary of a Coast to Coast episode.  My first interview ... ever.  We'll see how you folks like it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 9: Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Post by: astrostu on November 10, 2011, 05:07:25 AM
A year ago tonight, on November 10, 2010, George Noory on Coast to Coast "interviewed" Mike Bara, author of "The Choice" and Richard Hoagland's co-author on "Dark Mission."  There was a caller into the program that night who challenged Bara on one of the minor claims he made, and George cut him off, and he and Bara proceeded to talk about how Bara has "haters" out there.

I tracked down that caller and interviewed him for an episode of my podcast and I had him react to his call and George's and Bara's reactions with a year hindsight.  We talk about Bara's claims of science and early NASA history, a bit about Hoagland, and some about George's interview techniques and policy for callers and guests.  Here's the link to my podcast episode (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_010.php) (this is to the shownotes, there's a direct link to the MP3 from that page).

Let me know what you folks think.  I'll be interviewing The Conspiracy Skeptic in about a week and a half and would like to know what I screwed up this time so I can try to do better for next time.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Chew on November 10, 2011, 09:56:16 AM
The stupid, it burns. Hoagland et al are constantly promoting their "new physics" but have yet to understand the fundamentals of the old physics.

When you have Karl on be sure to publicly rag on him for not producing more episodes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Ravenhull on November 10, 2011, 11:02:52 AM
Enjoyed the interview.  Your style could use a little polishing, but that may be something that only experience can do.

On the other hand, is it bad that whenever I hear Hoagland referenced, I have the mental image of Phil Plait and the SGU guys doing their Seinfieldish "Hoaglannnnddd!!"?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Chew on November 10, 2011, 11:14:53 AM
On the other hand, is it bad that whenever I hear Hoagland referenced, I have the mental image of Phil Plait and the SGU guys doing their Seinfieldish "Hoaglannnnddd!!"?

That is why I made this clip to feed that mental image: https://sites.google.com/site/chewtansy/msfn/HoaglandPhilandtheRogues.ogg
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Parrot on November 10, 2011, 10:30:38 PM
Good Interview!  I like these bonus episodes that you're bringing out.  Good idea to make it an interview too, that's a lot less work for you, so you can put out more material without compromising on time for your main episodes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: astrostu on November 10, 2011, 10:51:08 PM
Good Interview!  I like these bonus episodes that you're bringing out.  Good idea to make it an interview too, that's a lot less work for you, so you can put out more material without compromising on time for your main episodes.
Thanks. You wanna come on at some point and talk for a half hour about ancient aliens? :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Parrot on November 11, 2011, 12:17:47 AM
Good Interview!  I like these bonus episodes that you're bringing out.  Good idea to make it an interview too, that's a lot less work for you, so you can put out more material without compromising on time for your main episodes.
Thanks. You wanna come on at some point and talk for a half hour about ancient aliens? :D

I'd love to.  Just let me know when you want to schedule something and we'll work it out.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: astrostu on November 11, 2011, 12:34:09 AM
Good Interview!  I like these bonus episodes that you're bringing out.  Good idea to make it an interview too, that's a lot less work for you, so you can put out more material without compromising on time for your main episodes.
Thanks. You wanna come on at some point and talk for a half hour about ancient aliens? :D
I'd love to.  Just let me know when you want to schedule something and we'll work it out.
I have episodes planned through December (at 1/week), so let's talk later on about maybe Jan or Feb.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: astrostu on November 14, 2011, 05:31:50 PM
Episode 11 is written and I'll probably record it tomorrow morning.  I'll say now that no one on this thread got the puzzler from episode 9 completely correct.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Ravenhull on November 16, 2011, 09:15:54 AM
Minor quibble.  Gish Gallop and Moving the Goalposts aren't the same.  MoG is when you respond to their argument with a proof and they try to force you to present a more detailed or expansive proof.  An example from creationist is that there are no 'transitional' fossils, and when presented with a fossil linking two others, they ask for a transition between it and one of the other fossils.  On the other hand, the hoax proponent on the radio clip was doing a classic Gish Gallop.

As for the Puzzler, it seems the simple answer is that the events creating the moon dust differ across the the moon.  Different areas are affected by different events which create, move or destroy the regalith.  For example, the various moon 'seas' were created (if I remember right) by molten rock that flowed into low lying areas, and any dust there would have to been settled after the event.  On the other hand, another adjacent area which did not have this happen to it would have older deposits.  Also, as you mentioned in the podcast, there would be deeper areas of dust surrounding an impact crater would be deeper than areas further away.  Finally, since there is effectiveley no weather on the moon, then there is very little action to distribute the dust once it settled.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: astrostu on November 16, 2011, 12:01:38 PM
And as Ravenhull implied, episode 11 is up. :)  I'll make the correction on MG / GG next time.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 10: Interview About Mike Bara's "The Chosen"
Post by: Parrot on November 16, 2011, 04:05:56 PM
You've got to love it when they debunk themselves!

"You can't get footprints in something like regalith when it's not wet!  Look at sand!"

"There are materials on Earth you can use and get these kinds of footprints."

"Examples from Earth don't count!"
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 11: Dust & Rock Claims of the Apollo Hoax
Post by: astrostu on November 16, 2011, 04:49:37 PM
You've got to love it when they debunk themselves!

"You can't get footprints in something like regalith when it's not wet!  Look at sand!"

"There are materials on Earth you can use and get these kinds of footprints."

"Examples from Earth don't count!"

Yes, that was BY FAR my favorite point when I initially listened to Sibrel back on March 21, 2009.  I pulled off my headphones, went over to a friend's office, and made him listen to it, too.  It SO highlights the intellectual dishonesty in the guy and his willingness to just say ANYTHING that he thinks will win him the argument at that particular moment -- screw the one made 30 seconds earlier.

P.S.  I almost didn't want to make this comment 'cause my previous reply here put my post count to 666, and the SGU forums did something awesome.  I took a screenshot.  :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 11: Dust & Rock Claims of the Apollo Hoax
Post by: seaotter on November 17, 2011, 09:55:40 AM
Thank you so much for that one! I've gotten good at the explanations of the hoaxers "evidence" but convincing proof is great. What were the micrometeor caters called? I downloaded the grand prix moon clip and the bonus question today was what do you see in the video that is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that we went to the moon? Can't wait for my class with all the physics geeks. They are going to love it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 11: Dust & Rock Claims of the Apollo Hoax
Post by: astrostu on November 17, 2011, 11:48:38 AM
Thank you so much for that one! I've gotten good at the explanations of the hoaxers "evidence" but convincing proof is great. What were the micrometeor caters called? I downloaded the grand prix moon clip and the bonus question today was what do you see in the video that is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that we went to the moon? Can't wait for my class with all the physics geeks. They are going to love it.
Thanks :).  I'm hoping in future hoax 'casts that I'll be able to do some balance of the "actual evidence we DID go to the moon" as opposed to "why we did NOT not go to the moon."  The micrometeorite impact craters are called "zap pits."  The two "p"s that are back-to-back but separate words make it impossible to say correctly quickly.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 11: Dust & Rock Claims of the Apollo Hoax
Post by: seaotter on November 17, 2011, 12:15:55 PM
Bonus question tommorrow : what are zap pits?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast Ep 11: Dust & Rock Claims of the Apollo Hoax
Post by: astrostu on November 23, 2011, 08:48:16 PM
Episode 12 is now up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_012.php)  While you're cooking USAian Thanksgiving Day food, enjoy listening to the docile tones of the Conspiracy Skeptic, Karl Mamer, talking about how the Nazis have a base inside the hollow Earth at the south pole.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: astrostu on December 01, 2011, 03:06:14 AM
Episode 13 is now up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_013.php)  It's the first in a four-part series, Intro to 2012.  This one is about the True story behind Planet X.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: Parrot on December 01, 2011, 01:22:11 PM
Your question about what defines a planet got me thinking.  We all know about the new definitions cutting off Pluto's planet status, but I got to wondering about the other end of the spectrum.

Should gas giants be considered planets?  They're certainly not the same kind of thing as the Earth or Venus.  Should they perhaps be in a category all their own?

Has there been other discussion about that in astronomical communities?  I somehow doubt that I'm the first to have these thoughts.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: astrostu on December 01, 2011, 01:24:36 PM
Should gas giants be considered planets?  They're certainly not the same kind of thing as the Earth or Venus.  Should they perhaps be in a category all their own?
The generally accepted cutoff between a gas giant and a brown dwarf is deuterium fusion which happens at about 13 Jupiter masses.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: seaotter on December 01, 2011, 06:17:35 PM
There is terrestrial vs Jovian.

I say a planet is an object that orbits around it's star with a significant metallic core.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: quirk3k on December 02, 2011, 08:45:15 PM
This sounds an awful lot like a planet continuum. Brown Star → Jovian Planet → Terrestrial Planet → Dwarf Planet → Asteroid.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: seaotter on December 02, 2011, 08:46:11 PM
Meteoroid
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #13: The True Story of Planet X
Post by: astrostu on December 03, 2011, 04:47:10 PM
Thanks folks for the input.

I've just finished recording roughly an hour interview with a Mayan scholar for December 8.  He's Swedish and so there were some pauses so it'll probably be edited down to 30-45 minutes.  Hopefully it comes across well.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: astrostu on December 09, 2011, 01:00:48 PM
Episode 14 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_014.php)  I interview a Mayan scholar from Sweden to get the low-down on what the Mayans really said about 2012 as my Intro to 2012 month continues!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: quirk3k on December 10, 2011, 09:36:17 PM
I found this interview at bit hard to follow. I'm not sure if it was the accent, the odd speech patterns, or just ineffective communication, but I had to rewind many times to try to understand a good number of the points. At times Dr. Normark seemed to contradict himself. I'm still not sure how reliable some of the calendar conversions are, what ancient mayans vs modern revivalists believe, and a few other points. Still, I enjoyed the episode and I really would like to hear more on this topic.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: astrostu on December 10, 2011, 09:46:37 PM
I'll admit that part-way through I was second-guessing the wisdom of interviewing someone who is not a native English speaker.  I did it originally because he and I have been exchanging information for about the last two years, so he seemed like a natural person to ask.  I also tried several times to break in to ask more directed questions but he kept talking so it was a bit hard for me to do from my standpoint, as well; I think there was a small delay in phone lines.  I tried to summarize what Johan was saying on the blog so that it would be a bit easier to follow:

(1) Johan’s background and interest in 2012, (2) about the Mayan calendar, (3) how their calendar may or may not line up with ours, (4) who some of the big players are or big claims related to 2012 from his perspective, (5) his least favorite “popular” claims related to the Maya or archaeology in general, (6) evidence, and (7) what the Maya actually “said” about 2012.

To summarize the interview, basically, there are three calendars, and it's the Long Count that's the issue with 2012.  Problem is that we don't know if it actually ticks over to anything important in 2012 because there is at least a ±52 year uncertainty in the often-used correlation with our current calendar.  For most Mayan scholars, this is NOT an issue because they're usually more interested in relative dates (like 100-year spacings versus this happened in 21 BC).  Another problem is that the Long Count (a) doesn't "reset" nor (b) "end" at the "end" (let's say it's 2012), it just continues.  As opposed to the other two calendars (Tzolken and Haab) which do cycle like our months/weeks, the Long Count is just that - a count of days.  It reaches effectively another higher-up digit (like going to 100,000s after the 10,000s) in 2012, and there are Mayan inscriptions that go well past this apparent "end" so we know that they didn't "say" anything bad was going to happen.

The rest of it was more a discussion of what some particular people think, but that's less important because I'll be getting into Jenkins and Joseph and Sitchin and all these other folks as the next 13 months progress.  What I found interesting was that these folks basically take as gospel the calendar correlation that says it ends in 2012, even though it likely doesn't tick over and definitely doesn't end.  Kinda like how the doomsday people took to heart the NASA prediction in 2005 that the next solar max would be in 2012 (ack! doomsday!) but NASA revised it as far back as 2008 to say it's more likely to reach the peak in 2013 or 2014 ... but the 2012 doomsday people just ignore that.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: Caffiene on December 10, 2011, 10:02:02 PM
The main problem for me was that he simply didnt seem to be a very engaging speaker, at least in English. I had particular trouble for the first half, where he spoke quite monotonously, but I found that he sounded more animated towards the end and I was able to follow the train of thought better.

Ill have to check out his blog. There was a lot of interesting information there when I could overcome the presentation issue.

(Btw, youve got a typo in the direct link you posted above)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: astrostu on December 10, 2011, 10:04:29 PM
The main problem for me was that he simply didnt seem to be a very engaging speaker, at least in English. I had particular trouble for the first half, where he spoke quite monotonously, but I found that he sounded more animated towards the end and I was able to follow the train of thought better.

Ill have to check out his blog. There was a lot of interesting information there when I could overcome the presentation issue.

(Btw, youve got a typo in the direct link you posted above)

Fix-ed.  In the show notes page that's not properly linked up, I've pulled out some of the most pertinent posts of his that deal with the calendar.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: astrostu on December 15, 2011, 05:01:55 PM
Late-breaking time-sensitive request:  Can anyone think of a good puzzler that has to do with alignments?  I can only think of one and it's a basic physics "you know it or you don't" thing and it's also somewhat contrived.  Please PM me or e-mail me (puzzler@sjrdesign.net) within 7 hours of this message's posting (3PM MST) if you have one!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #14: The Mayan Calendar
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 02:36:39 AM
Fortunately, I found someone with sorta an idea that worked for the puzzler.  Anyway, episode 15 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_015.php) is up:  Galactic Alignments, Part 1.  And yes, I checked the link, it works this time.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 16, 2011, 05:22:44 AM
Well, first of all it's a "Dumbass Media Empire Production", not a "Dumbass Media Production Production", but I appreciate you mentioning my podcasts.

I think the point of the suggested listening is that certain podcasts may be more linked than others.  Most people who listen to skeptical podcasts probably listen to the SGU, but the selections probably aren't selected for total numbers.  They're likely looking for more subtle links between podcasts.  I've plugged both your show and the Skeprechauns, so it seems reasonable that there would be a certain amount of crossover that would register.

Anyway, regarding the puzzler, how about centrifugal force?  I'm given to understand that it's not actually a force in a technical sense, but my guess is that spinning an egg like a top might help it stabilize, at least while it's spinning.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Caffiene on December 16, 2011, 05:25:24 AM
Really enjoyed this one.

Lots of interesting facts and figures, plus I really enjoyed your presentation for this one. I actually laughed out loud numerous times. "Dont do this while driving!" And the tone of voice you used when you talked about how you were going to have some episodes on Hoagland's "ideas..." was classic. I think probably the most entertaining episode so far. Id do an iTunes review, except for the fact that I dont use iTunes.

Oh, and for the record: Yes, I did listen all the way to the end :D I lold again.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 10:32:20 AM
Well, first of all it's a "Dumbass Media Empire Production", not a "Dumbass Media Production Production"
I called it a "Dumbass Media Production production."  There's a difference. ;)  And I realized the empire thing about 2 hours after I posted the episode.

I think the point of the suggested listening is that certain podcasts may be more linked than others.
They're smart enough to go out and find links?

Really enjoyed this one.

Lots of interesting facts and figures, plus I really enjoyed your presentation for this one. I actually laughed out loud numerous times. "Dont do this while driving!" And the tone of voice you used when you talked about how you were going to have some episodes on Hoagland's "ideas..." was classic. I think probably the most entertaining episode so far. Id do an iTunes review, except for the fact that I dont use iTunes.

Oh, and for the record: Yes, I did listen all the way to the end :D I lold again.
Thanks, and good to know. :)  So, the moral of the story is that I should continue to record these when I'm really tired?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: mindme on December 16, 2011, 12:54:52 PM
I'm given to understand Mayan scholars, the serious academics, are so inundated with psycho crap email that they just ignore non-academics wanting to talk to them. It's brilliant Stuart was able to get one. I really didn't have any problem with the interview. Yeah, english wasn't his first language but I thought it lent a certain "I'm a scholar" tone.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 07:08:30 PM
Dude! I'm using you as a source. I was hoping you would actually critique my definition of a planet. In listening to the other definitions I've come to recognize my bias against Pluto. I think this comes from the fact that it doesn't fit nicely into terrestrial or Jovian camps. Maybe an ice planet?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 07:29:34 PM
Maybe an ice planet?

When I was in undergrad ... more than a few years ago ... Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune were considered "gas giants."  Now, they're teaching Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants."  This is why I don't like labels ... Pluto is what it is ;) .
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 07:35:38 PM
Maybe an ice planet?

When I was in undergrad ... more than a few years ago ... Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune were considered "gas giants."  Now, they're teaching Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants."  This is why I don't like labels ... Pluto is what it is ;) .

I'll be sure to pass that along to my students mr chamberlain
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 08:10:51 PM
Okay, in all seriousness though, solar system objects are usually taught now by features.  When I taught my intro class, I did solar system formation and in that talked about asteroids and comets.  Then I talked about differentiation and atmospheres.  In atmospheres I talked about Venus, Earth, Titan, and the outer gas planets.  Then I did volcanic processes and so talked pretty much about EVERY solid surface, including the cryovolcanoes on Triton.  Then tectonics and again hit Earth, stagnant lid on Venus, Mars, and Ganymede.  Magnetic fields again did Earth, Mars, and gas giants along with Ganymede.

The point of me going through all that is that really these days it's about features and comparative planetology rather than "First you start at the sun, now let's study Mercury!  Then Venus.  Oh look, Earth is next and it has a moon .... Now we've done Neptune, but, well, I could talk about Pluto or I could talk about the Kuiper Belt and comets, but what do I call Pluto and these other things!?"  It's kinda only important to younger kids, the public who gets whipped up by politicians and news reporters, and people on the New Horizons mission (Alan Stern ...).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 08:18:08 PM
So what do you think of the iron core definition for planet, gven that I don't see planets status going away any time soon?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 08:20:33 PM
I thought it was intriguing.  The problem is that we don't know what has an iron core (or a heavy metal core).  For example, Vesta is differentiated so it would be a planet under your definition.  But we don't know if Pluto is.  It kinda fails the "Star Trek" or "Spock" test, though, where you'd have to send something there to study it for awhile to figure out if it's a planet under your definition.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 09:06:13 PM
Well, my definition obviously opens a debate as to what a "significant" n/i core is.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 09:07:16 PM
Well, my definition obviously opens a debate as to what a "significant" n/i core is.
That, too.

BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 09:16:57 PM
Well, my definition obviously opens a debate as to what a "significant" n/i core is.
That, too.

BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!

Well, that's freaking awesome! My request, for both your show and any appearances on other shows is to advocate when the "spirit" strikes to advocate a visit if not membership to the forum.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 09:19:02 PM
Well, that's freaking awesome! My request, for both your show and any appearances on other shows is to advocate when the "spirit" strikes to advocate a visit if not membership to the forum.
To what forum?  Oh, and the interview will be about 2012. Karen thinks that's a good way to end this year and lead into next.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 09:20:28 PM
There can be only one!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 09:22:07 PM
I see.  So this one. :P
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 16, 2011, 09:24:07 PM
U r obviously a heretic!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 16, 2011, 11:29:15 PM
BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!

That's awesome!  Most guests on Point of Inquiry have written a book or something, it's pretty cool that they invited you on just for having a great podcast.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2011, 11:32:47 PM
BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!
That's awesome!  Most guests on Point of Inquiry have written a book or something, it's pretty cool that they invited you on just for having a great podcast.
Yeah, sure, we'll say that's why ...

Thanks though. :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 17, 2011, 12:18:17 AM
BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!
That's awesome!  Most guests on Point of Inquiry have written a book or something, it's pretty cool that they invited you on just for having a great podcast.
Yeah, sure, we'll say that's why ...

Thanks though. :)

You haven't written a book, have you?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 17, 2011, 12:19:01 AM
BTW, I'm now a pretty much confirmed guest for "Point of Inquiry" podcast for Dec. 26.  W00t!
That's awesome!  Most guests on Point of Inquiry have written a book or something, it's pretty cool that they invited you on just for having a great podcast.
Yeah, sure, we'll say that's why ...

Thanks though. :)

You haven't written a book, have you?
Correct.  Though I still wanna do my 2012 eBook.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 17, 2011, 12:24:37 AM
You haven't written a book, have you?
Correct.  Though I still wanna do my 2012 eBook.

I'd read it!

Have you done something else other than your podcast and blog that would catch the attention of the people at Point of Inquiry?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 17, 2011, 12:33:00 AM
You haven't written a book, have you?
Correct.  Though I still wanna do my 2012 eBook.

I'd read it!

Have you done something else other than your podcast and blog that would catch the attention of the people at Point of Inquiry?

Thanks, and no.  Guess I'll come clean. :)

Karen Stollznow, an occasional host of POI, is presently dating one of the guys in the local "Rocky Mountain Paranormal Society" (a group where the two main guys do believe in ghosts, but go around showing that every bit of evidence so far is b.s.).  I've met with her through them a few times because they go to the local skeptics events.  The last one was when Randi was in town last Wednesday, and we did a dinner afterwards.  I talked with Karen about the Alex Tsakiris interview and told her I wanted to do a blog post picking apart his crap during that interview and she was interested after rolling her eyes over it.

Anyway, to make a short story even longer, one of the other skeptics (Reed Esau, the originator of Skepticamp) who was there put in a plug telling Karen that she should interview me for something, such as POI, that I had just started my "Intro to 2012" month on my own podcast (I'd given her my card for the 'cast the previous night at a pre-dinner for Randi), and it would be a good topic.  We made a little joke about how this was now not the same thing as Alex inviting himself onto MonsterTalk and then she said that she'd be interested and asked if I'd be free in the next few months to record.

I wasn't entirely sure it would happen as I thought she might have just been humoring Reed.  To get it off the checklist, I went ahead in the next few days and did my Tsakiris post and FB'ed it to her.  And then today I get the FB invite from her to be a ~30-minute interview to be recorded next Thursday morning.

So ... yeah.  I absolutely DESPISE networking and making smalltalk, but sometimes it can result in good things. :)

Oh, and I also had given Karen a mini apple pie cookie a few months ago when I helped her bf set up for a show on campus.  I don't know if she remembered that, but it couldn't've hurt.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 17, 2011, 12:48:21 AM
We had our epic confrontation arranged by Bryan and Baxter of the Rocky Mountain Paranormal Society.  They seem to have a lot of contacts in the skeptical community.

I didn't realize that they actually believe in ghosts, but that's worthy of respect that they don't let their personal beliefs distort the evidence.

They haven't updated their archives since my episode.  Their past archives are also pretty spotty.  But I've listened to a number of their shows.  I just wish they were more dedicated to getting their work out there for people to enjoy.  It's very difficult for me to make the time to listen live on Monday nights.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 17, 2011, 12:50:10 AM
I agree with you on B&B.  I know they have full-time jobs and all, but it would be nice if they were better at following up with things.  And yeah, I totally forgot about our confrontation back in ... May?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on December 17, 2011, 01:00:26 AM
I agree with you on B&B.  I know they have full-time jobs and all, but it would be nice if they were better at following up with things.  And yeah, I totally forgot about our confrontation back in ... May?

Yep, May 30'th.  I was originally scheduled for June 6th, but some important stuff came up and I had to spend the 6th flying on planes and walking through airports.  I think the only reason they bothered to put up the episode they recorded with me was that I had mentioned that I could use some extra content and I'd appreciate if they could update their most recent episodes.

Seriously though, if they're feeling lazy I'm fine with them skipping any editing and just putting the episodes up on the net as they were recorded.  That's the way people hear it when they tune in anyway.  It's just a click and a drag to upload the files, and updating the RSS feed takes only a few moments.... unless I'm missing something.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: quirk3k on December 20, 2011, 08:03:21 PM
When I was in undergrad ... more than a few years ago ... Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune were considered "gas giants."  Now, they're teaching Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants."  This is why I don't like labels ... Pluto is what it is ;) .

Hey, speaking of that soft of thing. What's the deal with Saturn?
I understand that Jupiter is basically a failed brown dwarf. I have a vague idea that Uranus and Neptune are roughly large rocks with just enough mass and far enough away from the sun to keep their formation gases.

Now, how does Saturn form with such a small mass compared to it's volume?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 20, 2011, 08:12:00 PM
When I was in undergrad ... more than a few years ago ... Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune were considered "gas giants."  Now, they're teaching Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants."  This is why I don't like labels ... Pluto is what it is ;) .

Hey, speaking of that soft of thing. What's the deal with Saturn?
I understand that Jupiter is basically a failed brown dwarf. I have a vague idea that Uranus and Neptune are roughly large rocks with just enough mass and far enough away from the sun to keep their formation gases.

Now, how does Saturn form with such a small mass compared to it's volume?

How do you mean failed BD? It's my understanding that fusion takes temperatures in the millions of degrees. Jupiter gets ~60,000 degrees. That's a monumental failure, and saturn comes about as close. They are both mainly hydrogen and helium just like our sun.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: quirk3k on December 20, 2011, 08:38:23 PM
I understand that Jupiter is basically a failed brown dwarf.

How do you mean failed BD? It's my understanding that fusion takes temperatures in the millions of degrees. Jupiter gets ~60,000 degrees. That's a monumental failure, and saturn comes about as close. They are both mainly hydrogen and helium just like our sun.

Jupiter has too little mass (~10 Jupiter masses makes a brown dwarf), but from what I've been lead to believe was right on the cusp when it formed. The more mass something has the more mass it can attract. I could be wrong (and I couldn't find it online), but I remember from my astronomy class that some estimates say that if Jupiter's proto-planet was twice it's initial size, it would have been able to gather the mass it needed to become a brown dwarf.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on December 20, 2011, 08:42:26 PM
Interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_dwarf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_dwarf)

Quote
Brown dwarfs are sub-stellar objects which are too low in mass to sustain hydrogen-1 fusion reactions in their cores, which is characteristic of stars on the main sequence. Brown dwarfs have fully convective surfaces and interiors, with no chemical differentiation by depth. Brown dwarfs occupy the mass range between that of large gas giant planets and the lowest-mass stars; this upper limit is between 75[1] and 80 Jupiter masses (MJ). Currently there is some debate as to what criterion to use to define the separation between a brown dwarf and a giant planet at very low brown dwarf masses (~13 MJ ), and whether brown dwarfs are required to have experienced fusion at some point in their history. In any event, brown dwarfs heavier than 13 MJ do fuse deuterium and those above ~65 MJ also fuse lithium. Some planets are known to orbit brown dwarfs: 2M1207b, MOA-2007-BLG-192Lb, and 2MASS J044144‎b.


Being 13x too small is still pretty far off. Astrostu what about this 2x size getting it up to BD?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 20, 2011, 11:32:09 PM
I don't remember what quirk3k is saying from any of my classes, but the details of planet formation change very quickly these days due to Moore's law with computing power (or specifically # transistors).  We keep doing higher N N-body simulations and see that the old models fail on some point, so we have to incorporate more minor physics that we couldn't or didn't have to before.  That said, just thinking about it, I'm not sure how Jupiter would have had enough material in its feeding zone to get a runaway effect to >13 M_J to start to fuse deuterium.  I would think that its growth would've had to happen really early on and I don't know about these timescales.

But yes, as I told Parrot, 13 M_J is the cut-off on the high side for a planet - at least that's what most agree upon.  Doesn't matter what it "could" have been, it matters what it is.  Again, the whole Spock / Star Trek test.  Or Judge Judy's "Keep it Simple, Stupid."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on December 20, 2011, 11:33:16 PM
Episode 16 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_016.php) is up, "What the Sky Looks Like on December 21, 2012, Part 2."  It's short.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: seaotter on December 20, 2011, 11:34:33 PM
Thanks for the podcast!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: quirk3k on December 20, 2011, 11:43:53 PM
That said, just thinking about it, I'm not sure how Jupiter would have had enough material in its feeding zone to get a runaway effect to >13 M_J to start to fuse deuterium.

Uggg… looks like yet another unreliable remember fact from my youth :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Caffiene on December 20, 2011, 11:48:48 PM
Episode 16 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_016.php) is up, "What the Sky Looks Like on December 21, 2012, Part 2."
Sweet. Was just looking at my playlist of unlistened-to stuff and lamenting theres no podcasts on it.

Quote
It's short.
Aww.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #15: Galactic Alignments, Part 1
Post by: Chew on December 20, 2011, 11:52:24 PM
Episode 16 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_016.php) is up, "What the Sky Looks Like on December 21, 2012, Part 2."  It's short.

AM or PM?!?!?

Never mind. You said Am later in the show.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Parrot on December 21, 2011, 02:58:34 PM
I think I misunderstood the puzzler last time - you're talking about a force that might help an egg stand up only on the equinox?  In that case, I've got nothing.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Ravenhull on December 21, 2011, 03:30:10 PM
Why, its because of the psychic gesault of the belief that it can happen reshaping reality to make ti happen...

<fish slap>

Sorry... I'm better now...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: astrostu on December 27, 2011, 12:51:54 AM
I'm up on Point of Inquiry. (http://www.pointofinquiry.org/stuart_robbins_the_end_of_the_world_as_we_know_it/)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Parrot on December 27, 2011, 02:44:17 AM
I'm downloading the episode now, looking forward to hearing it!

For some strange reason, I've always pictured you as a blond.  My record on mental images of people matching up in real life isn't very impressive.  I guess I need to work on honing my psychic skills in that regard.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: astrostu on December 27, 2011, 02:46:50 AM
For some strange reason, I've always pictured you as a blond.  My record on mental images of people matching up in real life isn't very impressive.  I guess I need to work on honing my psychic skills in that regard.
I could photoshop the photo if you want ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Parrot on December 27, 2011, 02:51:06 AM
I could photoshop the photo if you want ...

Great idea!  Then I can claim a hit! 

.... and I defy anybody to tell me that it wouldn't be just as valid as any other psychic's hits out there!!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: astrostu on December 29, 2011, 02:13:04 AM
I could photoshop the photo if you want ...

Great idea!  Then I can claim a hit! 

.... and I defy anybody to tell me that it wouldn't be just as valid as any other psychic's hits out there!!
Okay, my attempt looks like a really bad dye job.  I'm not going to post it. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Caffiene on December 29, 2011, 03:32:56 AM
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4890/sjrblonde.jpg)

... No?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: astrostu on December 29, 2011, 03:35:16 AM
Oh, that's a very BIG no.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Ravenhull on December 29, 2011, 08:50:50 AM
I went looking for a good picture that shows where the planets will be on 22 December 2012, and while I found a few a sites that let you plot it out, I couldn't find a good, simple, clear pictures that I could post on FB or such.  Anybody know where I could find one?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Chew on December 29, 2011, 09:17:03 AM
I went looking for a good picture that shows where the planets will be on 22 December 2012, and while I found a few a sites that let you plot it out, I couldn't find a good, simple, clear pictures that I could post on FB or such.  Anybody know where I could find one?

Heavens-Above.com has a solar system chart. You can enter a date and time to the nearest hour: http://www.heavens-above.com/planets.aspx?lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET (http://www.heavens-above.com/planets.aspx?lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET)

(http://i.imgur.com/e6oKK.png)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: Ravenhull on December 29, 2011, 09:33:38 AM
I like that one.  Only problem I have is the odd lettering system, but that's in no way a game breaker.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #16: What the Sky Looks Like on Dec 21, 2012
Post by: astrostu on January 01, 2012, 07:51:29 PM
Episode 17 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_017.php) is up:  Gregg Braden and Data Mining.  It took several hours longer to get up 'cause I was REALLY busy this past week.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: Chew on January 01, 2012, 10:00:11 PM
1. Yes, it's true, when measured from the surface of the body nearest the organ of question.
2. The distance where the heart's magnetic field equals the Earth's magnetic field is 0.0003 of the distance from the heart to the chest, i.e., if the distance from the heart to the chest is 5 cm then the magnetic fields are equal 0.0015 cm above the heart, assuming the heart's surface were a point source and neglecting near field effects.
3. The signal to noise ratio of the field could extend beyond that distance but not out to the chest.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: Parrot on January 02, 2012, 06:39:31 AM
LOL - there was no reason for you to mention my little stab in the dark, I'd misunderstood the question and didn't really have anything valid to say there.

By the way, I laughed several times when you were reading out those emails.  I just got a couple of comments like that myself where I just know they'll provide great entertainment value for my next episode.  Check out these comments by "armysniper" (scroll down, the top comment is my response):

http://www.dumbassguide.info/comment.php?bid=67 (http://www.dumbassguide.info/comment.php?bid=67)

http://www.dumbassguide.info/comment.php?bid=54 (http://www.dumbassguide.info/comment.php?bid=54)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: astrostu on January 02, 2012, 12:54:46 PM
Yeah, I decided that the main segment was more of a rant this time so I wanted to inject some humor in the feedback.  I've written about that stuff now for a few years so there were plenty of comments to choose from. :)  And really, a lot just don't require responding to.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: seaotter on January 02, 2012, 01:01:56 PM
The silence after a couple of those was hilarious.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: Belgarath on January 02, 2012, 02:19:32 PM
All I'm saying is that magnetic fields are making us fat....... (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299040)

:)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: astrostu on January 06, 2012, 03:25:22 AM
Hey folks, I spent many many many hours going through almost 200 predictions for 2011.  I've posted them here (http://wp.me/pjMYE-hX).  Would it be wrong for me to use these as one of the more "off-topic" even releases during the month?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: seaotter on January 06, 2012, 10:01:14 AM
I'm totally interested.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #17: Gregg Braden and Data Mining
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 03:32:03 PM
Episode 18 of my podcast has been posted (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_018.php).  This episode is another interview one, this time with "Parrot," AKA "Dumbass" who has spent a lot of time on his blog and podcast (http://www.dumbassguide.info/) going over many of the claims by ancient aliens proponents.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Parrot on January 08, 2012, 03:34:55 PM
I'll download it right away!  I'm very curious about what I had to say!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 03:35:58 PM
I'll download it right away!  I'm very curious about what I had to say!
Yeah, I spent about 2 hrs editing you down by two whole minutes!  I learned some new stuff the second time 'round.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Parrot on January 08, 2012, 03:43:12 PM
Yeah, I spent about 2 hrs editing you down by two whole minutes!  I learned some new stuff the second time 'round.

Only 2 minutes of what I had to say were complete nonsense?  I think you're being far too generous! :)

But did I say things that were unclear on first listening? I want to strive to make sure that things make sense the first time around.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 03:55:44 PM
I think you made sense, in general.  I only cut out two "lengthy" segments of about 30 seconds each, otherwise it was cutting out a few 1-2 second pauses or long "Ummmmmmmmmm"s.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Chew on January 08, 2012, 03:58:22 PM
I think you made sense, in general.

 :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Parrot on January 08, 2012, 04:00:46 PM
I'm sounding a little echo-y.  I thought you had a headset... or was there something strange going on at my end perhaps?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 04:02:57 PM
I didn't notice you sounding echo-y, but there were 3 times for a few minutes where your mic quality (or internet signal) was a bit degraded.  I didn't think it was enough to mention and go back and try to re-record.  And yes, I had your audio into me through a headset and I was using a stand-alone mic to talk, so any echo was not on my end.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Parrot on January 08, 2012, 04:06:25 PM
Well, I tend to record my Skype sessions as well so if this happens in the future just ask and I'll send you my copy so that you can splice in the feed from my end if I ever start to break up on you.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 04:07:38 PM
Sounds good.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Parrot on January 08, 2012, 04:36:29 PM
Your picture of Tsoukalos' hair is missing.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 04:39:39 PM
Your picture of Tsoukalos' hair is missing.
Link was slightly off.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:13:52 PM
(http://www.dumbassguide.info/images/sitedisplay/jet_goldenflyer_comparison.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 08, 2012, 06:17:25 PM
(http://www.dumbassguide.info/images/sitedisplay/jet_goldenflyer_comparison.jpg)
I don't see any difference between those two except for the color.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:18:39 PM
It's undeniable.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Belgarath on January 08, 2012, 06:22:28 PM
I don't see any difference between those two except for the color.

Well, the teeth on the second one are a bit of a divergence, but overall it's a perfect match...


Astrostu:  I just listened to Ep 17 and am going to listen to this one soon, probably as I walk to the bookstore in a little bit.  But I have a question about accelerating the solar system.

Yes, I know, completely hypothetical, but if could you do that a'la Larry Niven's Fleet of Worlds,  would you have to apply the same acceleration to each of the individual planets, or would they just follow the sun if you were to apply the acceleration to just the sun?  I know completely useless knowledge, but interesting, none the less.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:27:22 PM
(http://www.sciencephoto.com/image/326220/530wm/R3600044-_Kermit_the_Frog_lava_flow_on_Mars-SPL.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:28:05 PM
(http://fullygeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mars_smiley.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:30:16 PM
Here is homer on mercury.

(http://www.theness.com/images/blogimages/mercuryhomer.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Chew on January 08, 2012, 06:31:15 PM
It's not that far of a stretch to claim something shaped like a bird can fly. If it weren't made out of gold. And had some means of propulsion.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:35:20 PM
Look the aleins have testicles.

(http://lh6.ggpht.com/_4607aWHTvKI/TXJHaRwm8gI/AAAAAAAADVo/swlnPVWOLT4/Mars-double-crater_thumb%5B2%5D.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:37:27 PM
Predator Skull!

(http://i44.tinypic.com/mn2f51.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:38:54 PM
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Mars3/Heart_Crater04b.png)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Chew on January 08, 2012, 06:40:11 PM
Do the Bigfoot on Mars next!

Fighting Teddy Roosevelt.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Belgarath on January 08, 2012, 06:40:31 PM
Oh for the love.   SPAM!!!!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 08, 2012, 06:43:54 PM
Oh for the love.   SPAM!!!!

Cranky cranky.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 12, 2012, 06:24:46 PM
2017!!!

I heard an astronomer say that the sun might go out at the next solar minimum. That's only 5 years away!

Great interview stu!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: mindme on January 13, 2012, 08:19:39 AM
If the sun for some reason just stopped fusing, it would take about 10,000 before it radiated away enough heat that we'd notice.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: seaotter on January 13, 2012, 10:11:11 AM
Tell that to the "astronomer".
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: astrostu on January 16, 2012, 09:11:07 PM
Episode 19 is posted:  John Lear (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_019.php).  Learn about the conspiracy of Venus, the moon's atmosphere, and its engines.


I have a question about accelerating the solar system.  Yes, I know, completely hypothetical, but if could you do that a'la Larry Niven's Fleet of Worlds,  would you have to apply the same acceleration to each of the individual planets, or would they just follow the sun if you were to apply the acceleration to just the sun?  I know completely useless knowledge, but interesting, none the less.

Not sure on this one, my gut reaction is that you have to apply the acceleration to everything, but for some reason (could be sleep-lack-of) I can't think of why.  It would make a good future Q&A, though. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #18: Interview on Ancient Aliens with "Dumbass"
Post by: Caffiene on January 16, 2012, 09:15:54 PM
Episode 19 is posted:  John Lear (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_019.php)

FTFY. You got a stray " in your link.

Other than that, yay! Good day for podcasts today... Exactly what I needed.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 16, 2012, 09:17:07 PM
Episode 19 is posted:  John Lear (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_019.php)

FTFY. You got a stray " in your link.

Other than that, yay! Good day for podcasts today... Exactly what I needed.

Curses!  The one time in the last month I didn't check ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Chew on January 16, 2012, 10:40:51 PM
Victory is mine!

Yes, I listened to it, in case you did what you threatened to do.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 16, 2012, 10:41:43 PM
Victory is mine!

Yes, I listened to it, in case you did what you threatened to do.

 >:D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Ravenhull on January 17, 2012, 09:00:36 AM
I love the fact that you were able to debunk him with, of all people, Hogland.  ;D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 17, 2012, 12:39:13 PM
I love the fact that you were able to debunk him with, of all people, Hogland.  ;D

Yeah, I almost felt dirty doing it.  But I also thought it important to show that I'm not against people, I'm willing to listen when they make valid arguments.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Chew on January 17, 2012, 02:21:39 PM
Puzzler: it's not the most accurate way of determining the surface gravity of the Moon but it's my favorite because of its pure serendipitousnessocity: Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/a14pendulum.html)

After landing the Apollo 14 astronauts went about deploying equipment from the descent module. To deploy one particular piece of equipment required pulling several lanyards. They pulled one lanyard and let it go and it started to swing. The period of a swinging pendulum is dependent on the acceleration of gravity.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: mindme on January 18, 2012, 09:41:25 AM
Great episode.  Oh yeah, what was the production company at the end? I didn't catch the name. "brought to you by RobbinsPeachStealingMonkeys" or something.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 18, 2012, 11:40:17 AM
That's for me to know and you to re-listen.  Did you get the subliminal message part-way through?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: mindme on January 18, 2012, 01:11:14 PM
That's for me to know and you to re-listen.  Did you get the subliminal message part-way through?

No. But I had a powerful urge to shoot certain political leaders. What of it?

[Dear NSA/CSIS, that is called satire.]
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Chew on January 18, 2012, 01:31:40 PM
That's for me to know and you to re-listen.  Did you get the subliminal message part-way through?

No. But I had a powerful urge to shoot certain political leaders. What of it?

[Dear NSA/CSIS, that is called satire.]

Noted.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: DK on January 18, 2012, 03:15:33 PM
The only thing I know about C2C radio is what I've picked up from here, but do they seriously have no quality control on the guests that they have on? The holes in that guys arguments were so huge you could have flown one of his Pappys jets through.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: mindme on January 18, 2012, 04:21:44 PM
The only thing I know about C2C radio is what I've picked up from here, but do they seriously have no quality control on the guests that they have on? The holes in that guys arguments were so huge you could have flown one of his Pappys jets through.

C2C rules seems to be "you can crack a story? I can crack a six pack and a mike for you."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Parrot on January 18, 2012, 05:32:07 PM
I'm assuming there's some way of measuring the properties of the moon by measuring the tides, but I have no idea what the details of those calculations would be.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: seaotter on January 20, 2012, 09:51:09 PM
Astrostu what was the twitter feed and do you want to be on the sgu twitter list?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 20, 2012, 09:56:21 PM
My personal twitter feed is now @DrAstroStu while the show's is @PseudoAstro .  Sorry, I'm new to the new-fangled Twit'r thing - what does it mean to be on the SGU twitter list?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: seaotter on January 20, 2012, 10:05:45 PM
http://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,25741.msg9129517.html#msg9129517 (http://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,25741.msg9129517.html#msg9129517)

It's a list of forum members who do the twitter thing.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: Belgarath on January 20, 2012, 11:50:39 PM
My personal twitter feed is now @DrAstroStu while the show's is @PseudoAstro .  Sorry, I'm new to the new-fangled Twit'r thing - what does it mean to be on the SGU twitter list?

Adding you now, sir.  SkepticalBelg is me.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #19: John Lear (and some of his claims)
Post by: astrostu on January 21, 2012, 03:31:48 PM
http://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,25741.msg9129517.html#msg9129517 (http://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,25741.msg9129517.html#msg9129517)

It's a list of forum members who do the twitter thing.
Sure
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: astrostu on January 24, 2012, 01:18:58 AM
Episode 20 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_020.php) is up - a high school student from New Zealand discusses his work taking on the US Institute for Creation Research.  Note that he warned me that he had a few enunciation problems, but I said we should go ahead with the interview.  There are a few spots where it's a bit hard to understand what he's saying, but otherwise it's understandable.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: Belgarath on January 24, 2012, 01:19:57 AM
Episode 20 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_020.php) is up - a high school student from New Zealand discusses his work taking on the US Institute for Creation Research.  Note that he warned me that he had a few enunciation problems, but I said we should go ahead with the interview.  There are a few spots where it's a bit hard to understand what he's saying, but otherwise it's understandable.

Woo hoo.  Something for me to do before I sleep tonight!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: astrostu on January 24, 2012, 01:20:33 AM
Woo hoo.  Something for me to do before I sleep tonight!
And it's short, too!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: Belgarath on January 24, 2012, 01:28:08 AM
I have a suggestion for an Episode, Stu.  How about one on the Flat Earth myth?  I've been reading up quite a bit on this and it's really fascinating.  For example, the Flat Earth 'theory' didn't really exist much in Columbus' time, most everyone thought the world was round.  It really got going with a guy named Samuel Rowbotham in the early 1800's.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: astrostu on January 24, 2012, 01:29:52 AM
Of course it's a myth.  It can't be flat if it's hollow.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: Belgarath on January 24, 2012, 01:41:05 AM
Of course it's a myth.  It can't be flat if it's hollow.

Certainly it can be.  The land floats on the everlasting sea.  In order to do this, there is air under the land which we perceive as hollow.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: Parrot on January 24, 2012, 10:23:17 AM
I heard once that podcasters are supposed to do their 21st episode while drunk.  Any chance that you'll be engaging in this custom? ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: astrostu on January 24, 2012, 12:13:46 PM
I heard once that podcasters are supposed to do their 21st episode while drunk.  Any chance that you'll be engaging in this custom? ;)
I don't imbibe.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #20: High Schooler Tackles Creationism
Post by: astrostu on January 31, 2012, 11:01:56 PM
Episode 21 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_021.php)  The topic du quarter is geographic pole shifts, or at least some peoples' mechanisms and evidence.  Feb. 8's episode will be more about possible mechanisms and how to see for yourself that we're not already in one.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on January 31, 2012, 11:44:44 PM
What the deuce? Episode 19???

Ah, ok, now it's 21.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on January 31, 2012, 11:46:20 PM
What the deuce? Episode 19???
Third person to point it out, second person after I fixed it.  Reload the page.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on January 31, 2012, 11:47:16 PM
Hey what's up with episode 19?  ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on January 31, 2012, 11:54:43 PM
Hey what's up with episode 19?  ;)
I'm on 2 hrs of sleep here, people.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Belgarath on February 01, 2012, 12:47:41 AM
Hey what's up with episode 19?  ;)
I'm on 2 hrs of sleep here, people.

Who's problem is that?  Just sayin :)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on February 01, 2012, 12:54:45 AM
Hey what's up with episode 19?  ;)
I'm on 2 hrs of sleep here, people.

And he's drunk! (Suuuuuure you don't imbibe!!)  ;D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on February 02, 2012, 02:01:37 AM
Puzzler: if the poles shifted (I'm assuming 180°) the stars would be out of whack (i.e. Polaris would be above the south pole, constellations and lunar features would appear inverted). Everything would still rise in the east and set in the west but the synodical (solar) day would be 3m 56s shorter and the Moon would appear to advance westward instead of eastward.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on February 07, 2012, 02:36:55 AM
The crackpots claim Nibiru is a brown dwarf. Brown dwarfs have a visual absolute magnitude of 25, which is about 10,000 times fainter than the Day Star. The crackpots say it swings through the Solar System every 3600 years and most crackpots say it will pass by Earth on the Mayan Apocalypse. All this means that, as described, Nibiru would have been as bright as Sirius in January 2010 (as it passed Saturn's orbit). And twice as bright as Jupiter is now. You would have thunked someone would have seen it by now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on February 08, 2012, 02:12:11 AM
Hmm.  Am I supposed to be putting out another episode about now?

And Chew, I will be talking about that in the following episode for Feb. 16.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on February 08, 2012, 02:17:45 AM
OMG, I'm psychic!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on February 08, 2012, 02:19:01 AM
Perhaps.  Of what am I thinking right now?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on February 08, 2012, 02:31:08 AM
Perhaps.  Of what am I thinking right now?

Psychic powers don't work that way.  :-[
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on February 08, 2012, 02:32:17 AM
I see.  So if I try to design a test to test your powers, they will fail because they can't be tested?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #21: The Geographic Pole Shift, Part 1
Post by: Chew on February 08, 2012, 02:47:05 AM
I see.  So if I try to design a test to test your powers, they will fail because they can't be tested?

Exactly! By the simple act of testing psychic powers you affect the outcome. The quantum consciousness resonance vibrates against the polarity of the mind's harmonical inductance inverting the wellness quotient.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on February 08, 2012, 10:40:53 PM
Episode 22 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_022.php) is up.  It's shorter, about 18 minutes, and finishes up where I left off last episode.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2012, 12:54:58 AM
It's possible I have strep - I'm seeing a doctor in about 10 hours.  It's possible the next episode may not be out by the end of the 16th.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Chew on February 16, 2012, 01:18:36 AM
It's possible I have strep - I'm seeing a doctor in about 10 hours.  It's possible the next episode may not be out by the end of the 16th.

Enough of your lame-ass excuses!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2012, 01:38:59 AM
It's possible I have strep - I'm seeing a doctor in about 10 hours.  It's possible the next episode may not be out by the end of the 16th.
Enough of your lame-ass excuses!
My ass is quite nice, thank you very much.  And I don't want to record bacteria and viri.  I'm fairly sure they can be transferred from me through the mike to the MP3 through headphones/speakers to you.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Belgarath on February 16, 2012, 01:46:35 AM
Get Better!  Then Podcast.  Go now!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Chew on February 16, 2012, 01:49:59 AM
It's possible I have strep - I'm seeing a doctor in about 10 hours.  It's possible the next episode may not be out by the end of the 16th.
Enough of your lame-ass excuses!
My ass is quite nice, thank you very much.  And I don't want to record bacteria and viri.  I'm fairly sure they can be transferred from me through the mike to the MP3 through headphones/speakers to you.

Well, if that's how that works then we better not take any chances.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: mindme on February 16, 2012, 09:39:02 AM
I just love this podcast.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Parrot on February 16, 2012, 03:11:28 PM
I just love this podcast.

You WOULD say that - being his publicity agent and all!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2012, 03:27:37 PM
I just love this podcast.
You WOULD say that - being his publicity agent and all!
One would HOPE he'd say that, at least publicly.

The N.P. I saw said the rapid strep test came back negative (it only gives true pos, false neg, true neg) so they're sending it in to culture but due to the weekend I won't hear 'til Monday.  If it is strep or a related bacteria, because I've had it for a few days and the crap that can happen with strep if it lingers, she put me on a 5-day antibiotic course even though we don't have results yet.  If it's a virus (which the culture won't show), then it just has to run its course, and the antibiotic wouldn't do anything other than to prevent some scheming bacterium from taking advantage of my distracted immune system (which is the case with my mom right now - she's a day ahead of me).  There's a possibility that it's mono, though unlikely, but that's also a virus so there'd be nothing that could be done.  I feel very slightly better today, so I'll take a stab at this, but I can't make any promises.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Chew on February 16, 2012, 03:43:27 PM
Dude, no hurries. Take your time and get better.

Or record it using Hawking's robot voice. :haw:
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: mindme on February 16, 2012, 03:57:24 PM
I just love this podcast.

You WOULD say that - being his publicity agent and all!

That's true. I got lost in the moment. Hey, how about that Jeremy Lin.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Parrot on February 16, 2012, 05:50:02 PM
I just love this podcast.
You WOULD say that - being his publicity agent and all!
One would HOPE he'd say that, at least publicly.

Does it bother you that it took him until post #341 to say it?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2012, 05:52:25 PM
Methinks thou art trying to sew discontent between a client and his representation.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #22: Proof We're Not in a Pole Shift, Part 2
Post by: Parrot on February 16, 2012, 05:58:15 PM
Methinks thou art trying to sew discontent between a client and his representation.

You both may be off my enemies list, but I'm still harboring some resentment!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #23: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on February 18, 2012, 07:52:13 PM
Episode 23 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_023.php) is now posted.  "The Fake Story of Planet X, Zecharia Sitchen, Part 1."  I have at least 3 follow-ups planned (Gilbert Eriksen, Nancy Leider, Southern Approach) to be done over the next few months.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #23: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on February 18, 2012, 11:36:04 PM
You should have doubled down on the insulting Canada thing.  It's much more fun when you start a mock insult war :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #23: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on February 18, 2012, 11:59:06 PM
Oh, it'll be continued.  I just want to make sure that some people who don't get my humour won't be offended and stop listening.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #23: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 1
Post by: mindme on February 21, 2012, 10:00:28 AM
The true essence of being Canadian is when someone is mocking Canada,  the person laughing the most in the room is the Canadian. It does take a sense of humor to live in Canada. More so when people want to question your patriotism for not spelling it "humour".
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: astrostu on February 24, 2012, 07:33:23 PM
Okily dokily, Episode 24 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_024.php) is up.  I recommend having the diagrams up in the shownotes while listening.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: quirk3k on February 24, 2012, 08:09:36 PM
Okily dokily, Episode 24 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_024.php) is up.  I recommend having the diagrams up in the shownotes while listening.

Fixed the link in your initial post.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: astrostu on February 24, 2012, 08:25:13 PM
I seem to have the hardest time with posting links.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Chew on February 24, 2012, 08:26:50 PM
I seem to have the hardest time with posting links.

Sleep deprivation again?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: astrostu on February 24, 2012, 08:27:39 PM
I seem to have the hardest time with posting links.

Sleep deprivation again?

I had to take a 4-hr nap this afternoon.  Forced myself to get up to do this, now eating dinner, and then need to get back to working on a grant.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Ravenhull on February 25, 2012, 02:40:24 PM
Hugh or Cary?

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Belgarath on February 25, 2012, 04:28:47 PM
 
Hugh or Cary?

 :rimshot:
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Parrot on February 25, 2012, 04:51:18 PM
Hugh or Cary?

 :rimshot:

I had the exact same thought - but I didn't know if people would understand me spelling out "Ba-dump-dump-CHING!"
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Ravenhull on February 26, 2012, 11:14:21 PM
Thank you thank you, I'll be here all week... no applause, just throw money...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: mindme on February 28, 2012, 11:27:05 AM
It's stunning, really stunning, that people don't know the sun's location in the sky changes through the year.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Ravenhull on February 28, 2012, 11:55:12 AM
Goes with polls which show that a significant percentage of the population doesn't know how long it takes for the planet to orbit the sun, or think summer is caused by us being closer to the sun...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Chew on February 28, 2012, 12:00:11 PM
It's stunning, really stunning, that people don't know the sun's location in the sky changes through the year.

There are a lot of "the pole is shifting" YouTube videos. Not, the pole is going to shift on Dec 21, 2012, but that the pole is shifting right now. All these crackpots have to do is go outside at night and find the North Star the way they were taught to in elementary school and they will see it is not shifting. But these idiots are incapable of evaluating their own claims. The Mayan Apocalypse should be renamed the Dunning-Kruger Apocalypse.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: seaotter on February 28, 2012, 12:18:18 PM
Goes with polls which show that a significant percentage of the population doesn't know how long it takes for the planet to orbit the sun, or think summer is caused by us being closer to the sun...

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: mindme on February 28, 2012, 04:24:57 PM
You know, it would be March 1 tomorrow if it were not for the fact astronomers couldn't get their act together and produce a calendar that doesn't need a magical and onerous extra day every four years. I say, blame Astrostu. He and all his kind did this to us!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Chew on February 28, 2012, 06:40:40 PM
Let's burn down all the observatories so this never happen again!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Belgarath on February 28, 2012, 10:30:46 PM
You know, it would be March 1 tomorrow if it were not for the fact astronomers couldn't get their act together and produce a calendar that doesn't need a magical and onerous extra day every four years. I say, blame Astrostu. He and all his kind did this to us!

Yea, as evidence, I'm prepared to testify that he turned me into a newt.

She turned me into a NEWT! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzYO0joolR0&feature=related#)

I got better.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #25: The Magnetic Pole Shift
Post by: astrostu on March 01, 2012, 03:11:41 AM
Hmm.  Didn't get notified of the new posts.

Anywho, episode 25 is up now (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_025.php).  The Magnetic Pole Shift.  And I leave for the airport in 8 hours for a conference.  Joy.  I should probably start writing my presentation for it ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #25: The Magnetic Pole Shift
Post by: Ravenhull on March 01, 2012, 08:15:03 AM
A minor quibble about your webpage.  I wanted to send you a couple of questions, but I could not find your e-mail on your main page.  I ended up requeuing the latest episode and listening for when you gave it there.  You might want to put a 'contact me' link in a easy to find place.

(Granted, I have been known to look right past things...)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #25: The Magnetic Pole Shift
Post by: Chew on March 01, 2012, 11:18:51 AM
His Contact Me link is at the very bottom.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #25: The Magnetic Pole Shift
Post by: astrostu on March 01, 2012, 12:57:27 PM
A minor quibble about your webpage.  I wanted to send you a couple of questions, but I could not find your e-mail on your main page.  I ended up requeuing the latest episode and listening for when you gave it there.  You might want to put a 'contact me' link in a easy to find place.

(Granted, I have been known to look right past things...)

You're the second one to mention this, but I'm not quite sure how to make it more visible without it blaring out at you.  It's in the bottom footer, as Chew wrote.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #24: Help! The Sun (or Moon) Is Moving!
Post by: Parrot on March 01, 2012, 01:35:06 PM
You know, it would be March 1 tomorrow if it were not for the fact astronomers couldn't get their act together and produce a calendar that doesn't need a magical and onerous extra day every four years. I say, blame Astrostu. He and all his kind did this to us!

We should just move our clocks ahead by 59 seconds every day.  By the end of the first year we'll all be waking up in the afternoon, and by the end of the second year we'll all be nocturnal... but it's a small price to pay!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #25: The Magnetic Pole Shift
Post by: Chew on March 01, 2012, 03:22:34 PM
The north and south magnetic poles are 156° apart.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #26: Richard Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°
Post by: astrostu on March 08, 2012, 11:58:28 PM
Episode 26 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_026.php) is up:  Richard C. Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°.  A discussion of the vast energy release sources across the solar system at ±19.5° latitude.  Or not.  No audio clips in this episode.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #26: Richard Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°
Post by: Chew on March 09, 2012, 12:16:41 AM
Hoaglaaaaaaaand!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #26: Richard Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°
Post by: Chew on March 09, 2012, 12:20:04 AM
3rd link in the show notes doesn't work.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #26: Richard Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°
Post by: astrostu on March 09, 2012, 12:22:41 AM
Does too.  You're just imagining it doesn't work.  Try again.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #26: Richard Hoagland, Part 1 - 19.5°
Post by: Chew on March 09, 2012, 12:12:50 PM
Puzzler: Assuming the roof has to shade the patio when the Sun is at its highest point (i.e. local apparent noon) and the latitude of the house is 30°, the roof has to extend 3 meters ÷ tan(90° + declination - latitude)  = 1.73 meters past the patio; add the depth of the patio 4 meters and the roof has to extend 5.73 meters from the house. The Sun's declination at the equinoxes is 0°.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: astrostu on March 17, 2012, 10:28:06 PM
Episode 27 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_027.php) on stellar scams is up.  Different idea from the puzzler this time.  Listen to find out, and Chew, you have a 24-hour waiting period before you can answer. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: Chew on March 17, 2012, 11:27:12 PM
Chew, you have a 24-hour waiting period before you can answer. ;)

This is an outrage!!!

I am reporting you to the Federal Podcasting Authority!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: seaotter on March 17, 2012, 11:28:56 PM
No one expects the fpa!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: astrostu on March 17, 2012, 11:30:06 PM
No one expects the fpa!
Free Porn Association?  :P  (Yes, I saw Chew's post)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: Chew on March 18, 2012, 12:28:26 AM
Emily Lock-duh-wall-a

10 seconds in:

Snapshots From Space: Defending our Planet From Asteroids (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXfM5NAbsaQ#)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: astrostu on March 18, 2012, 12:31:15 AM
Emily Lock-duh-wall-a

Are you making fun of my pronunciation?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: Chew on March 18, 2012, 12:38:33 AM
Emily Lock-duh-wall-a

Are you making fun of my pronunciation?

What pronunciation? You didn't even try it to pronounce it this time!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: astrostu on March 18, 2012, 12:40:19 AM
Emily Lock-duh-wall-a

Are you making fun of my pronunciation?

What pronunciation? You didn't even try it to pronounce it this time!

Egg-zactly.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: Parrot on March 18, 2012, 10:06:56 AM
Chew, you have a 24-hour waiting period before you can answer. ;)

Guess who won the challenge I put out on my most recent episode. ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: seaotter on March 20, 2012, 12:05:47 AM
Idea: why not undercut the scams with the "real" thing? The IAU could sell stars at a discount to the scams and raise money for more astronomical research.

Or hell NASA could at least have the honorary NASA star name / donation to the NASA budget program.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #27: Stellar Scams
Post by: mindme on March 23, 2012, 11:32:12 AM
Great ep, Stu. The whole stellar/moon scam thing has been around for a long time and I thought this show would tell me a bunch of stuff I already knew but you managed to make it fresh and interesting. I did like your bit about being a real person on the ground and the difficult position you're put in when someone actually comes to one of your public viewing nights and wants to see the star named after her dead husband or child. Man. Moral dilemma.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 26, 2012, 09:03:25 PM
Episode 28 is up, hopefully I got the right link the first time. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_028.php)  This is part 2 of the Fake Planet X story, brought to you by Gilbert Eriksen (last time was Zecharia Sitchen).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: Caffiene on March 26, 2012, 09:07:35 PM
hopefully I got the right link the first time

No complaints this time :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: Chew on March 27, 2012, 01:08:36 PM
That was one of your most painful podcasts to date. 60 times the mass, same size as, made of lead? Arghhhhh! It's 6th grade chemistry, you fucking idiot!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 27, 2012, 01:10:24 PM
That was one of your most painful podcasts to date. 60 times the mass, same size as, made of lead? Arghhhhh! It's 6th grade chemistry, you fucking idiot!
Please, language, good Sir!  At least I didn't actually have him saying the stuff, it was just me quoting him.  Slightly less painful?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: Chew on March 27, 2012, 01:38:47 PM
Whether quoted or a sound clip it is just as painful.

I don't know how you do it without losing your mind.

"it comes in on the winter solstice line" WTF?

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 27, 2012, 02:32:22 PM
An e-mail I just got:  "I love your podcast, but please don’t add a ‘fact or fiction’ section. First of all, it’s a bit overused already, but most important, I always end up remembering the ‘fiction’ answer and making a fool of myself. I don’t need another opportunity for that. If you do, stick it at the end, so I can skip it easily."

Any of you folks who read this thread have thoughts with regards to this?  Problem is that coming up with a half-decent puzzler can take half as long as it takes to write the episode.  This takes <5 minutes.  And I've had 3 responses as opposed to 1 for the last puzzler.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: mindme on March 27, 2012, 04:20:00 PM
I agree the fact or fiction thing is over used. And it's easy enough to google and figure out. I figure. And you might find it takes just as long to write them regardless.

Is there some kind of astronomy trivia question you can ask? Testing maybe deeper knowledge. "We all know x but do you know how we discovered x?"

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 27, 2012, 05:00:46 PM
Is there some kind of astronomy trivia question you can ask? Testing maybe deeper knowledge. "We all know x but do you know how we discovered x?"

I agree that I don't want to make it Googleable.  But there's a problem with trivia or even asking basic math questions - people won't participate if it's too hard or requires too much work.  SGU has - what? 100k listeners? - and I would guess maybe a few dozen participate in their trivia.  I estimate mine now at around 1000.  Chew almost always participates, and sometimes I get one or two others.  When I met with Jeff in DC, he said that there was too much math or physics and that's why he didn't.

I don't want to make it too hard that people won't do it.  I don't want to make it too easy that Chew will get it in 2 seconds.  To quote a memorable line from a decent musical, "It is a puzzlement."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #28: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 2
Post by: Chew on March 27, 2012, 08:47:39 PM
I have to agree with the guy who gets the fact and fiction mixed up. Whenever I hear something related to a story I heard on the SGU I have to Google it to make sure it wasn't from the science of fiction segment and I was mis-remembering it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: astrostu on March 31, 2012, 11:39:36 PM
It seems like only five days ago that I posted a new episode, but I have another one up now.  Episode 29 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_029.php) on the asteroid belt being a planet, 'tis up.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 01, 2012, 12:48:45 PM
Here's one that can be used as a question on the show.  When Apophis makes its flyby in '29, how good a view will we get?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 01, 2012, 12:49:24 PM
(Mutters about Twitter joke) Will it take more than a day or so, and how well could amateurs see it?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Belgarath on April 01, 2012, 01:17:54 PM


This is really a big April Fool's joke and The asteroid belt really was a planet, right?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Chew on April 01, 2012, 01:40:25 PM
Ravenhull, I PMed you some info.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 01, 2012, 02:08:59 PM
Thanks
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Chew on April 01, 2012, 02:12:08 PM
There's a 140 character limit on PMs , too. Arghhh!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Chew on April 01, 2012, 02:26:26 PM
Puzzler: all debris from an exploding planet would not arrive at Mars at the same time, so the impact craters would not be confined to half.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Parrot on April 02, 2012, 12:30:29 AM
As I understand it, the planets are very, very small compared to the distances between them.

It seems to me that if some random guy exploded in the next city over, even if we assume there's nothing between us and no planetary gravity to pull the debris away from a straight path, by the time it reaches me the gore would be so diffuse that I probably wouldn't even notice it.

So the idea that a planet exploding would cause one side of Mars to become massively pockmarked seems suspect to me on those grounds.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 02, 2012, 06:55:55 AM
Reminds me a bit of watching one of Thunderf00t's "Why People Laugh at Creationists" when NephlinFree was claiming that the craters on the moon were created by the impact of waters ejected from the Earth during the flood when squeezed out of the interior of the planet...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: Caffiene on April 02, 2012, 07:16:55 AM
I might be jumping the gun on the next episode, but... Question on the differentiation section: You say that the moon is differentiated, and that differentiation means that things formed by themselves. If so, doesnt that contradict the "moon as fragments from an earth impact" theory, which the latest SGU suggested was so far (until the news story they were discussing) the best candidate?

Why does the moon being differentiated not cause problems for the moon-from-fragments theory while it does cause problems for the asteroids-as-fragments theory?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #29: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 1
Post by: seaotter on April 02, 2012, 09:56:53 AM
Got to listen but I'm going to throw in anyway. Wouldn't an impact big enough to break the earth and supposed object broken to make asteroids vaporize/liquefy these  bodies? I would expect the moon to differentiate internally as it cooled, but expect asteroids that formed after the collision to make asteroids to form homogeneous chunks. That is unless they coalesced very quickly after the event, which I don't see.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #30: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 2
Post by: astrostu on April 08, 2012, 09:13:18 PM
Episode 30 is up! (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_030.php)  Just in time for the new week, the drive to work on Monday, etc.  At least in some parts of the world.  While last episode was all 'bout some ser'ous science, this one gets back into some pseudoscience with the asteroid belt's origin and Mars' craters.  I also spend several minutes on the feedback (posted by several of you) on last episode.

Now back to my tender balls in special sauce.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #30: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 2
Post by: Parrot on April 09, 2012, 12:36:48 AM
I think I misunderstood the question when you asked the puzzler in the last episode.  I thought you were talking about planets, I somehow didn't catch on that you were talking about orbiting moons.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #30: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 2
Post by: astrostu on April 09, 2012, 12:37:45 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I phrased the puzzler in the best of ways.  Oh well.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #30: Was the Asteroid Belt a Planet? Part 2
Post by: Chew on April 09, 2012, 01:02:13 PM
I think I misunderstood the question when you asked the puzzler in the last episode.  I thought you were talking about planets, I somehow didn't catch on that you were talking about orbiting moons.

Yeah!

WTF, Stu?

But if Mars had been the moon of an exploded planet that might explain its wonky elliptical orbit...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: astrostu on April 16, 2012, 12:56:33 AM
And we've got Episode 31 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_031.php) now up:  Part 1 of photography claims related to the Apollo Moon Hoax.

Episode 32 is already recorded -- an interview (about 90 minutes!) with Derek Bartholomaus about Billy Meier.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 16, 2012, 07:51:38 AM
Good episode. While I had heard most of this before, many haven't, and you did cover it quite well for those who haven't.

Regarding the answer to my question, I was surprised about Venus.  As for Mars losing it quickly, is it possibly due to its smaller size and no close strong gravity effects allowing it to cool quickly, thus losing its dynamo motor. Also, considering the atmosphere stripping effect, is this a major problem with terraforming the planet?

And on a tiny nitpick, the city is pronounced "moe-Beele". ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: astrostu on April 18, 2012, 12:20:27 PM
Regarding the answer to my question, I was surprised about Venus.  As for Mars losing it quickly, is it possibly due to its smaller size and no close strong gravity effects allowing it to cool quickly, thus losing its dynamo motor. Also, considering the atmosphere stripping effect, is this a major problem with terraforming the planet?

Okay ... something I'll address in Feedback on May 1's episode.  Short answer is "yes."  Long answer might also be "yes."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: mindme on April 18, 2012, 12:51:28 PM
Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8

Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ewu6OqT-1qA&feature=channel&list=UL#)

Note the comment debate.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: Chew on April 18, 2012, 12:53:05 PM
Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8

http://youtu.be/m28DJWlixFo (http://youtu.be/m28DJWlixFo)

Note the comment debate.

Link is to Shin Hye Sung "First person" with English translation
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: astrostu on April 18, 2012, 12:54:00 PM
Yeah, I was about to say the same thing, Chew.  I don't think Karl may've wanted us to know what he watches on YouTube ... ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: Chew on April 18, 2012, 01:03:49 PM
A search for "Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8" does find this: http://youtu.be/Ewu6OqT-1qA (http://youtu.be/Ewu6OqT-1qA)

That's the moon hoaxer Jarrah White. He has come up with the most ridiculous claims: Apollo really launched but hid from view by going into a polar orbit. He thought "polar orbit" meant going around in circles above the north pole. And objects on the moon have 1/216 the mass (he really did mean mass, not weight!) as they do on Earth. Something about one sixth and one sixth and one sixth.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: mindme on April 18, 2012, 01:29:38 PM
Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8

http://youtu.be/m28DJWlixFo (http://youtu.be/m28DJWlixFo)

Note the comment debate.

Link is to Shin Hye Sung "First person" with English translation

You're too quick. Fixed it within seconds! Stupid  youtube advances you to the next video automatically. I copied the share URL without noticing it had advanced.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: mindme on April 18, 2012, 01:32:44 PM
A search for "Creepy Phil Plait Moon Hoax Stalker at TAM8" does find this: http://youtu.be/Ewu6OqT-1qA (http://youtu.be/Ewu6OqT-1qA)

That's the moon hoaxer Jarrah White. He has come up with the most ridiculous claims: Apollo really launched but hid from view by going into a polar orbit. He thought "polar orbit" meant going around in circles above the north pole. And objects on the moon have 1/216 the mass (he really did mean mass, not weight!) as they do on Earth. Something about one sixth and one sixth and one sixth.

He had asked his first question about the laser reflectors. The MB were inaccurate in reporting it was the first time they bounced a laser off the moon. Jarrah jumped all over that. Despite being told several times, he fails to grasp you need a very different kind of laser to get a signal return from the moon without reflector pads. The laser you use to hit the pads would not return a signal (or a much weaker signal or a predictably different signal) if you just tried to shoot it at the moon without the pads.

Adam answered "Oh, I did not know about the other laser experiment." Jarrah found that highly frustrating. He was clearly expecting "You're right! We never went to the moon! Let me now find you a Hollywood girlfriend!"

He tried to ask a follow up question but Q/A period is very very short. Only about 3 or 4 people get to ask questions. So naturally they said "no someone else can have a turn". The video I took was of him pacing around trying to get another question in. He's a frustrated lil fella.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: Ravenhull on April 18, 2012, 11:12:21 PM
Regarding the answer to my question, I was surprised about Venus.  As for Mars losing it quickly, is it possibly due to its smaller size and no close strong gravity effects allowing it to cool quickly, thus losing its dynamo motor. Also, considering the atmosphere stripping effect, is this a major problem with terraforming the planet?

Okay ... something I'll address in Feedback on May 1's episode.  Short answer is "yes."  Long answer might also be "yes."

Hope I'm not monopolizing any...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: astrostu on April 18, 2012, 11:14:27 PM
Regarding the answer to my question, I was surprised about Venus.  As for Mars losing it quickly, is it possibly due to its smaller size and no close strong gravity effects allowing it to cool quickly, thus losing its dynamo motor. Also, considering the atmosphere stripping effect, is this a major problem with terraforming the planet?

Okay ... something I'll address in Feedback on May 1's episode.  Short answer is "yes."  Long answer might also be "yes."

Feedback, not Q&A.  I have 3 Q&A Qs in the queue (none left from you).  I chose yours the last two times because I knew the answers.  The others I need to ask some folks or do some more research on.

Hope I'm not monopolizing any...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: DK on April 19, 2012, 03:58:19 PM
Regarding the puzzler for this episode, this is the moon above me at the moment:

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5196/7094302601_da1e3714fc.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/daveegan/7094302601/)
Waning Crescent (http://www.flickr.com/photos/daveegan/7094302601/) by DaveKidneys (http://www.flickr.com/people/daveegan/), on Flickr

Could be a bit difficult to take a photo of it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #31: Photography Claims of Apollo Moon Hoax, P1
Post by: astrostu on April 19, 2012, 03:59:58 PM
Yeah ... you have until May 1.  Sorry that I didn't double-check the moon phase before making this one, though.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 24, 2012, 04:13:48 PM
Episode 32 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_032.php)  It's my longest episode to-date, being about 11 minutes longer than my one with some dumbass.

Something you might want to watch is the comments section on the blog post (http://wp.me/pjMYE-ju) about this topic.  The last time I mentioned Meier and his mouthpiece, Michael Horn, the comments went over 250 and continued over 4 months after the post.  We'll see what happens this time.  I say in the blog post that I'm going to pay especial attention to moderating them, but I generally plan on letting most of what Horn posts go through so that people can see what an ass he is.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Chew on April 24, 2012, 04:47:43 PM
Meier and Horn? You should have posted this in the' you laugh you lose' thread.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 24, 2012, 04:49:02 PM
Meier and Horn? You should have posted this in the' you laugh you lose' thread.
Feel free.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Parrot on April 24, 2012, 11:36:31 PM
I think this is possibly your best episode so far.  Absolutely fascinating interview!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 24, 2012, 11:38:52 PM
Thanks, I thought it was really interesting, too.  Derek has done A LOT of work in the area and there is SO much to pick apart.  And we only had one off-topic digression that made it to air!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Parrot on April 25, 2012, 12:10:43 AM
I think the best topics are the ones where there is a whole lot to pick apart.  That's part of why I find Ancient Aliens so interesting.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Ravenhull on April 25, 2012, 08:37:09 AM
I agree, good interview. I got to see Derek at Dragon*con last year, and he had some of the reproduced models. Was fun to see them up close.

One thing I chuckle about is that many cases like this are kinda like a religious cult.  A leader/prophet who claims exclusive knowledge, aliens/supernaturals who refuse to give any solid proof, and apologists who try to spin away counter information...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 25, 2012, 12:20:33 PM
I agree, good interview. I got to see Derek at Dragon*con last year, and he had some of the reproduced models. Was fun to see them up close.
I watched it live-stream. :)

One thing I chuckle about is that many cases like this are kinda like a religious cult.  A leader/prophet who claims exclusive knowledge, aliens/supernaturals who refuse to give any solid proof, and apologists who try to spin away counter information...
Yeah, but I've been very careful about not calling it a cult.  I've come very close to it, though.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: mindme on April 25, 2012, 12:35:13 PM
I wonder if Horn's google alerts filter is broken. I dropped a mention of the twin terrors here:

http://www.skepticnorth.com/2012/01/toronto-aetherius-society-his-masters-voice-stuff-that-goes-boom-and-a-lack-of-proof-part-2/ (http://www.skepticnorth.com/2012/01/toronto-aetherius-society-his-masters-voice-stuff-that-goes-boom-and-a-lack-of-proof-part-2/)

And he never parachuted into the thread. He's the official north american representative! He should be representing in Canada!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 25, 2012, 01:15:10 PM
I figured at least he or "Bruce" would be posting.  Perhaps because it's a long episode, it's going to take them awhile.  But I fully expected to have at least one comment this morning to moderate from them.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Parrot on April 25, 2012, 01:19:52 PM
The man is definitely enthusiastic about his topic.  When I was on Stu's show talking about ancient aliens, he tried repeatedly to drag me into a debate about the Billy Meier case.  I kept on telling him that I had no knowledge of the Billy Meier case, and that the research I'd done had been into ancient alien claims which was something completely different.  He was very reluctant to accept the fact that I just didn't want to engage him on this topic.  It was a puzzling conversation.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: mindme on April 25, 2012, 01:25:28 PM
Evolution of my gmail filter:

(http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr112/mindmetoo/bounce.png)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 25, 2012, 01:26:41 PM
Yup, Karl, I finally got mine working right with anything from "theyfly" going to the Spam.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: mindme on April 25, 2012, 01:31:12 PM
He's such an idiot. He quickly realizes you're trashing his emails and then he creates another email account from his domain to keep up the one sided conversation.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Parrot on April 25, 2012, 04:01:01 PM
I actually managed to reach an amicable end to the conversation with him.  Stu didn't think it would be possible and advised me against it:

Quote
Hi D,

I thank you for your reply of course. And I respect that you don't wish to venture into that territory, though I stand by my point that it's certainly a cart-before-the-horse approach to discuss the ancient visitations premise before establishing any reason to do so. I'll only again add that Stuart seems to delight in such dabbling to try to appear knowledgeable while doggedly refusing to tackle that which bites back.

Regarding the  Vymaanika Shaastra, I would say that while I've not made an in-depth study of the information, I find a heck of a lot of smoke indicating fire at its source. So, since you probably actually have more in depth knowledge of that topic, I suggest that you may be inadvertently coming closer to a meaningful examination into that which would be the most important story in human history, if shown to be true.

Feel free to watch our documentary at either this site or mine.

I appreciate and enjoy your communication style,

All the best,

MH
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 25, 2012, 07:12:19 PM
We have our first commentor, someone I haven't heard from before, on my blog (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/podcast-episode-32-billy-meier-ufo-case-interview-with-derek-bartholomaus/#comments).

I do find it interesting that these Billy Meier people tend to be REALLY verbose in their comments.  Bruce, Jennifer, Horn, and now this guy, who has a blog with one post up from February that's a picture of Meier, all write really really long comments.

I haven't actually read what he wrote yet 'cause it's so long, but I did scan it just to check for language.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Ravenhull on April 25, 2012, 10:17:46 PM
Classic apologetics... lol
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: Parrot on April 25, 2012, 11:05:34 PM
I just briefly skimmed the comment - one part that caught my eye was how he was disputing the details of the accident by which Meier lost half his arm.  As though it mattered to the discussion whether the man was driving the bus or not.

That's dedication to pedantry right there! I love it!  ;D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #32: Billy Meier UFO Case with Derek B.
Post by: astrostu on April 25, 2012, 11:16:56 PM
Yeah, agreed.  As I said - he's just kinda nitpicking on minor things that don't matter towards the authenticity of the case.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 01:30:11 AM
Episode 33 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_033.php) is up on the Flat Earth.  We're back to ~25 minutes.  The main content is only 12 minutes, with feedback spanning around 8 minutes.

I'm not entirely sure what the next episode will be.  I have a presentation to give at the local coin club Thursday, Skepticamp Denver all day Saturday (and still need to write that talk).  And I have a lot of baking to do for that, too :).  So, next episode will either be a recording of my Skepticamp talk, or it will be about pyramids and Orion's belt.

Note:  When I say it's up, I posted this a bit too soon.  Gimme 10 minutes.

Note's Note:  Okay, 'sup now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Caffiene on May 02, 2012, 01:39:18 AM
We're back to ~25 minutes.

Boooooooooo!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Chew on May 02, 2012, 02:42:23 AM
Puzzler: yes. Sorry, it's going to be overcast tomorrow. non-parallel shadows - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=non-parallel%20shadows&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=FtOgT9KZCYragQelw4WsCQ&biw=1366&bih=637&sei=GdOgT9fvEoys0AHxh5CSCQ)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 02:44:33 AM
Puzzler: yes. Sorry, it's going to be overcast tomorrow. non-parallel shadows - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=non-parallel%20shadows&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=FtOgT9KZCYragQelw4WsCQ&biw=1366&bih=637&sei=GdOgT9fvEoys0AHxh5CSCQ)
Didn't I tell you to do your own experiment?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Chew on May 02, 2012, 02:55:51 AM
See? Overcast! Nyeh nyeh!

(http://i.imgur.com/zkiYl.png)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 02:56:33 AM
You have 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Chew on May 02, 2012, 02:58:24 AM
Oh poop.

Fine.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Parrot on May 02, 2012, 02:19:11 PM
I had a very similar experience regarding show comments.  A few days ago a very kind and thoughtful listener wrote me his thoughts on my show, and he opined that I've covered the Ancient Aliens topic to its saturation point and I probably should focus on other things.

Then just today I got a commenter on Reddit saying that he liked the show and asked for: "MORE ANCIENT ALIENS PLEASE."

 :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 02:25:23 PM
Yeah, well, I cut out A LOT of what this guy said.  Half of it was a rant about how I dispariage other countries while he ranted against America.  All while threatening to leave me a negative review.  I'm just like, um, if you don't like it, don't listen!  I think I cover a wide variety of topics though they are all focused around astronomy-ish-based pseudoscience.  It's kinda in the name.

For S&G, here's his e-mail in all its glory:

Quote
Hello, I have listened to all your 'casts so far. They are pretty good but you seem to be preaching to a select choir: "Chu" and "not-Chu." I am nowhere near either of them. I struggle to keep up and despite my IQ of somewhere between 148 and 179 I seldom fully understand what you are getting at. I guess that is because of an education wasted on liberal arts and critical thinking rather than on the so-called "real" sciences. Or perhaps I just do not have the spatial relationship intelligence required to imagine you waving your hands in the air whilst you describe three dimensional calculus ideas through a one dimensional media.

That being said, in the light of the fact that the next psychopath nutcase to run for Corporate Puppet Leader of the Greatest Nation of Thugs, Bullies and Murderers in history has suggested you morons build colonies on the moon, perhaps you could discuss the practical considerations of such an endeavour (the 'u' indicates I am Canadian, you know, from Soviet Canukistan, your toady neighbour to the South). I heard an interview with a guy called Bruce Damer, who claims to have designed Mars vehicles far NASA, in which he claims it is pretty much not a practical endeavour because of the corrosive dust.

Link to the interview: http://www.matrixcast.com/blog/ (http://www.matrixcast.com/blog/)

Along the lines of this theme perhaps you could discuss some notions such as what the physics is behind faster-than-light Star Trek-like space travel such as mass and energy requirements or what we know about the feasibility of long distance space travel, even only to Mars (not that your fake economy is going to be able to support these projects) or the feasibility (theoretically ... or is that hypothetically?) of Mars habitation. You could tie in the faster-than-light thing and space travel in general with your Coast To Coast obsession by discussing just how unlikely it really is we have experienced extraterrestrial visitors.

Another possible discussion would be, in light of the fad of finding planets out there, just how narrow the parameters for life as WE know it actually are and thus how rare the occurrence of complex life probably is through the galaxy or universe (given that single celled organisms are probably ubiquitous).

I have found some interesting material in your shows but I am getting kind of tired of your obsession with de-bunking morons from Coast To Coast radio. Are they really that important? Plus I am getting pretty tired of your disparagement of countries not United Snakes. You have a lot of gall denigrating other countries for spelling or accent differences when it is your country which is engaged in three active wars, is looking to start another (Iran), has suspended Habeus Corpus and your Constitution and has turned your entire parking lot of a country into a battlefield with each of you a potential terrorist. For fuck sakes, you morons can't even criticize your own food system without being prosecuted (remember Oprah? it IS illegal, along with almost all free-thinking in your so-called country) and every four years you vote against your own best interests (at least until three or four elections ago before they were all completely fixed). As a representative of a country of mentally deficient, egomaniac, blubberous land-whales, supporting the most dangerous regimes in history, you have no room, right or reason to disparage other countries even if it is in jest.

If you continue to obsess on Coast To Coast and pander to Physics geniuses I will likely very soon loose interest. If you choose a science education route I'm all for it. If I hear any more disparagement of other countries I will write a scathing, utterly negative review on I-Tunes. That - reviews - is what you are suck-holing for every week, isn't it? Well, in this case, be careful of what you ask for. (to see what Canukistanies think of you moronic fat fucks check this out. It even has an interview with Mike Huckabee, former contender, showing off his brilliance and intelligence: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7111005509913775935 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7111005509913775935)

When he said his IQ was 148-179, that was when I kinda tuned out of the e-mail, though I did give a pretty thorough reply, I thought.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Chew on May 02, 2012, 02:40:36 PM
Heh.

Quote
I struggle to keep up and despite my IQ of somewhere between 148 and 179

[...]

 Or perhaps I just do not have the spatial relationship intelligence

That's funny because spatial relationships is one of the major factors in determining IQ when someone is administered a real IQ test, not the online IQ tests that afterwards tell you the answers and allow you to take the same test again, which is obviously how this guy got his score.


Quote
(the 'u' indicates I am Canadian, you know, from Soviet Canukistan, your toady neighbour to the South).

North. Canada is to the north of the US. He wasn't kidding when he said he was poor in spatial relationships.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 02:42:18 PM
Yeah, I was trying to figure out how much of what he said was meant to be bad humor versus ranting versus real mistakes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: astrostu on May 02, 2012, 10:04:51 PM
P.S.  I'm working on my application to give a 15-minute talk at TAM.  If you're at all willing to look over it (it's <2 pages), please PM me an e-mail address and I'll send the DOC or PDF (please specify).  These are due May 15.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Belgarath on May 05, 2012, 01:42:58 PM
P.S.  I'm working on my application to give a 15-minute talk at TAM.  If you're at all willing to look over it (it's <2 pages), please PM me an e-mail address and I'll send the DOC or PDF (please specify).  These are due May 15.

PM sent and I posted this on your blog about the Flat Earth. 

If your listeners are interested in more information on the Flat Earth Conspiracy movement, there is a great book called “Flat Earth” by Christine Garwood published in the US by St. Martin’s Press.

It includes a history of the movement. It actually started in the mid 1800′s by a man called Parallax. Most of the arguments originate with him and have been the same ever since. It’s actually a very good primer for ALL conspiracy theories. There are a very few people who still think the Earth is flat, but the origins of at least the Canadian branch of the Flat Earth Society was started somewhat as a joke among friends.

I highly recommend it to anyone interested in Conspiracy theories in general and the Flat Earth Society in specific.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: Chew on May 06, 2012, 11:14:50 AM
The Sun finally came out after 4 days of overcast. You suck, Stu.

(http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz99/Chew64/Shadows.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #33: Flat Earth
Post by: mindme on May 07, 2012, 09:07:38 AM
P.S.  I'm working on my application to give a 15-minute talk at TAM.  If you're at all willing to look over it (it's <2 pages), please PM me an e-mail address and I'll send the DOC or PDF (please specify).  These are due May 15.

PM sent and I posted this on your blog about the Flat Earth. 

If your listeners are interested in more information on the Flat Earth Conspiracy movement, there is a great book called “Flat Earth” by Christine Garwood published in the US by St. Martin’s Press.

It includes a history of the movement. It actually started in the mid 1800′s by a man called Parallax. Most of the arguments originate with him and have been the same ever since. It’s actually a very good primer for ALL conspiracy theories. There are a very few people who still think the Earth is flat, but the origins of at least the Canadian branch of the Flat Earth Society was started somewhat as a joke among friends.

I highly recommend it to anyone interested in Conspiracy theories in general and the Flat Earth Society in specific.

I was researching a specific hollow earth claim that the nazis seemed, as doctrine, to believe we were living in a hollow earth and based their V2 rocket targeting on that and I kept coming across the Canadian branch. But it seemed to have closed down. Hrmph. Canadians just never stick it out. (The nazis did not, however, believe this... it's a vast distortion of the beliefs of a few nuts in the party.)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 08, 2012, 11:47:39 PM
And we've got the next episode up (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_034.php).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: Nudger1964 on May 09, 2012, 06:32:13 AM
hey up,
listen to a mumber of these shows and really enjoyed them.
I must say, my IQ is considerably less than 179, but i kinda think it would be great if you could bring in some of the more speculative space science which falls short of conspiracy theory. Faster than light travel is a decent example. Perhaps things like whether if SETI ever found a signal, is there any way in which it could be decifered. The grey area between mainstream space science and pure speculation would be a fantastic rich playground for great converstation.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: mindme on May 09, 2012, 09:03:32 AM
Keep with the Coast to Coast. As I say a lot about my own podcast and conspiracies, I like when "the other side" challenges our basic assumptions. "Of course we went to the moon. Errr... well how do we know?" For the non scientist , it's a great way to learn something. How do we know the earth is 4.5 billion years old? How do we know galaxies are millions of light years away? The c2c bunch pose a lot of assumption challenging questions. We all learn. Not sure why your letter writer doesn't get that.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: DK on May 09, 2012, 03:21:37 PM
The latest episode isn't downloading from iTunes. Is it a problem on my end or are iTunes being dicks again?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: Belgarath on May 09, 2012, 03:38:11 PM
I think I'm got something up to, it's not showing up in my google listen. :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 09, 2012, 03:55:09 PM
Helps if I update the RSS feed ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: DK on May 09, 2012, 03:58:30 PM
Ah, there it is...

Thanks.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: Ravenhull on May 09, 2012, 06:53:46 PM
Are there any fun PseudoAstronomy things you can do with either Jupiter's Red Spot or with the two funky moons of Saturn (the one that is half dark and the one that is the ringer for the Death Star).  I'm not counting Hoglandisms in this.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 09, 2012, 06:55:24 PM
NOT counting RCH?  Then no. ;)

At least, none that I know of.  Or that were not invented by my brother that I used in my college application essay.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: Caffiene on May 09, 2012, 08:30:03 PM
The link to the "version 2" correlation image in the show notes is broken.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 09, 2012, 08:33:19 PM
Nuh uh!  Try reloading ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: Ravenhull on May 10, 2012, 05:02:14 AM
And I figured something like the Red Spot would be a crank magnet. Damn you Hogland!  >:D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: DK on May 10, 2012, 06:01:14 AM
This was an interesting one for me as I read and believed some of Hancocks work when I was a teenager. Never knew that the whole Orion belt/pyramid thing meant you had to flip them upside down first. He neglected to mention that in his books...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 10, 2012, 06:52:35 PM
I decided not to bring in the Novella quote in a recent SGU episode about Hancock being a pseudoarchaeologist.  But yeah, I had always been meaning to look into this topic just to see what was there.  I didn't expect it to be quite as off as it was.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: DK on May 11, 2012, 06:20:57 AM
I remember watching some documentary about Hancock years ago that interviewed him and thoroughly debunked his nonsense. He has another claim about star alignment, this time in Cambodia (I think) where all these temples line up with these constellations.

Which is true.

If you ignore about a dozen other, larger, temples in the area and cherry pick ones that match your hypothesis. After that, I realised he was talking crap.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 11, 2012, 12:53:40 PM
Listen to any single episode of C2C with Hancock and you'll know he's talking crap. ;)  And it's easy considering he's on fairly frequently.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #34: Giza Pyramids / Orion ¿Correlation?
Post by: astrostu on May 11, 2012, 11:02:59 PM
Starting a new segment this next episode.  New news about previous topics.  We'll see what y'all think 'bout it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #35: Apollo Moon Hoax Photos, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on May 17, 2012, 12:50:41 AM
Episode 35 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net) is up with a new segment.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #35: Apollo Moon Hoax Photos, Part 2
Post by: Ravenhull on May 17, 2012, 09:10:15 AM
More good stuff. Only point I have is that I think the photo claim people are claiming that the astronaut was superimposed over the crosshairs, which is just as stupid in that you would think the photo phakering phreaks would be bright enough to redraw the lines. Typical conspiracy thinkers thinking the conspiracy is either stupid, or related to The Riddler....
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #35: Apollo Moon Hoax Photos, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on May 17, 2012, 02:51:38 PM
Yeah, I really don't understand the whole superposition argument.  It's insane that someone would put in the fiducials afterwards, on 1000s of photos, risking just this issue ("revealing a clear composite"), instead of just inserting the glass plate into the camera originally.  Or not doing it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #35: Apollo Moon Hoax Photos, Part 2
Post by: Chew on May 17, 2012, 03:03:21 PM
Or laying down the foreground equipment, then laying down the fiducials, then adding a piece of equipment onto the already laid down piece of equipment. Other complete crosshairs can be seen on the same piece of equipment.

Besides all the hoaxers claim it was filmed in a studio. Why would you need to add fiducials to photographs taken of the rover in a studio?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #35: Apollo Moon Hoax Photos, Part 2
Post by: Tuatara on May 19, 2012, 11:21:55 AM
Really enjoying the show Stu and the new segment is a good one. As you said, it shows the self correcting nature of science and helps us keep up to date as well.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: astrostu on May 19, 2012, 12:21:05 PM
Episode 36 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_036.php) has been posted.  Both audio and video versions.  Let me know of any issues as it's my first time posting a video ... and I've started working on a video for ep. 35.  And I'm recording ep. 37 today.  Big podcast day here ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: Belgarath on May 20, 2012, 12:56:16 PM
Video came through fine, I preferred the audio because it had a bit better sound quality.  Dunno why if they came from the same source.  Compression differences maybe?

Anyway, both 35 and 36 were great, keep it up, sir.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: astrostu on May 20, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
The video and audio versions did not have the same source.  For the audio, I had my own microphone on a nearby table.  I've just gotten requests for slides, etc. in the past for these talks so since I had the video, I thought, I'd try.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: Belgarath on May 20, 2012, 04:07:12 PM
The video and audio versions did not have the same source.  For the audio, I had my own microphone on a nearby table.  I've just gotten requests for slides, etc. in the past for these talks so since I had the video, I thought, I'd try.

Oh, don't get me wrong, the video was a good idea, I sometimes wish SGU did a video recording, I think it might increase the size of their audience.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: astrostu on May 21, 2012, 09:48:53 PM
First cut for Sunday TAM talks should have sent emails yesterday.  Guess I didn't get a talk this year. :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: Belgarath on May 21, 2012, 11:00:21 PM
First cut for Sunday TAM talks should have sent emails yesterday.  Guess I didn't get a talk this year. :(

Screw that, we'll have our own talk. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: astrostu on May 22, 2012, 11:00:58 AM
Just got an e-mail as one of 16 adressees saying that they're now delaying until Friday.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: Chew on May 24, 2012, 08:11:20 PM
First cut for Sunday TAM talks should have sent emails yesterday.  Guess I didn't get a talk this year. :(

Told ya to add more edumakashun!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #36: GAPs of Young-Earth Creationists
Post by: seaotter on May 24, 2012, 08:17:01 PM
More skin!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 24, 2012, 09:10:43 PM
Was gonna post this last night, but the SGU boards seemed to be down.  Episode 37 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_037.php) is up (and has been for almost a day).  Anyone familiar with Karl's podcast should recognize Lord and Lady Saint Whitehall who came on to talk about space law as a follow-up to my episode on stellar scams and extraterrestrial real estate.

I found it a really interesting - if different kind of - interview.  Let me know what you think.


Also, just on a whim, I searched iTunes for "astronomy" podcasts.  Mine didn't show in any of the three pages.  Any idea why / what I can do to get it there?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: seaotter on May 24, 2012, 09:12:58 PM
It was great. Kind of folks it would be cool to drink with. much like the forum. note need beer.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nigel on May 25, 2012, 06:52:55 AM
Luckily, we enjoy beer.  Lady is the talker and the brains of our operation.

Hope everyone enjoyed it.  I always think I sound like a goof.  Lady is brilliant as is her way.   

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: mindme on May 25, 2012, 08:35:48 AM
What's the URL to your podcast? http://www.astronomypodcast.com (http://www.astronomypodcast.com) would get a very high rank on google. sjrdesign/astronomypodcast would also likely do it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: seaotter on May 25, 2012, 08:38:09 AM
Luckily, we enjoy beer.  Lady is the talker and the brains of our operation.

Hope everyone enjoyed it.  I always think I sound like a goof.  Lady is brilliant as is her way.

Like folks from the forum is coming into focus. Does your wife post?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: seaotter on May 25, 2012, 09:14:03 AM
So blowing up an asteroid or comet armeggedon style to save the planet is against treaty law?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: mindme on May 25, 2012, 09:38:04 AM
URL: http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/ (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/)

Change it to http://astronomy_podcast.sjrdesign.net/ (http://astronomy_podcast.sjrdesign.net/)

Greetings!

Make that an H1 and change it to "Greetings! Welcome to my Astronomy Podcast"

Google tends to go "okay someone is searching for an astronomy podcast so a URL with astronomy_podcast in it is probably on topic. And if the H1 has the term in it, that's probably what it's about".

http://www.ecreativeim.com/blog/2011/03/seo-basics-hyphen-or-underscore-for-seo-urls/ (http://www.ecreativeim.com/blog/2011/03/seo-basics-hyphen-or-underscore-for-seo-urls/)

If at some point you can get Phil on his blog to link to your podcast using astronomy podcast (http://"http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/") as the active link, again, google counts that. "Wow a high ranking page votes THIS page as an astronomy podcast then it probably is about that". (Phil has a page rank of 7/10)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: mindme on May 25, 2012, 10:43:45 AM
http://pennsundayschool.com/profiles/blogs/exposing-pseudoastronomy?xg_source=activity (http://pennsundayschool.com/profiles/blogs/exposing-pseudoastronomy?xg_source=activity)

Try to get people to link you up like that. More of those kinds of links. They're "votes" that that phrase will deliver the goods. I don't know if penn sunday school has a "no follow" setting, however. Many do. No follow tells google NOT to count it as a vote. Some admins have a no follow policy to keep people, like me, from link spamming in the manner I clearly just did.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 25, 2012, 02:43:16 PM
Thanks for the tips, Karl.  I actually wasn't as concerned about Google rankings, though I did do a quick search just now and I'm ranked 17th if you do a search for "astronomy podcast" in Google (even on a separate browser where I'm not logged in).

I'm more concerned at the moment about iTunes not showing it in searches.  If I search just for podcasts with the name "astronomy" in the title, it doesn't show.  If I search for "astronomy" in the description, it doesn't show.  I checked my RSS feed and it seems everything's in order and I'm not missing anything, but I can't figure out why it's not showing.

Here's part of my feed code:

Code: [Select]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Exposing PseudoAstronomy</title>
    <link>http://podcast.sjrdesign.net</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>&#x2117; &amp; &#xA9; 2011 Stuart Robbins</copyright>
    <itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:author>Stuart Robbins</itunes:author>
    <itunes:summary>Listen to learn the real state of science behind astronomy-, physics-, and geology-related creationist claims, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, misconceptions, and bad or incomplete media reporting.</itunes:summary>
    <description>Listen to learn the real state of science behind astronomy-, physics-, and geology-related creationist claims, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, misconceptions, and bad or incomplete media reporting.</description>
    <itunes:owner>
      <itunes:name>Stuart Robbins</itunes:name>
      <itunes:email>feedback@sjrdesign.net</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
    <itunes:image href="http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/logo_med.jpg" />
    <itunes:category text="Science &amp; Medicine">
    <itunes:category text="Natural Sciences"/>
    </itunes:category>
    <item>
      <title>Episode 37: Space Law and Extraterrestrial Property Rights, Interview with Nigel and Lady Saint Whitehall</title>
      <itunes:author>Stuart Robbins</itunes:author>
      <itunes:subtitle>Interview with two lawyers about space law and owning rights to property and materials off-Earth.</itunes:subtitle>
      <description>I interview Lord and Lady Saint Whitehall, two lawyers with pseudonyms, as a follow-up to Episode 27 (Stellar Scams). We discuss the Outer Space Treaty, legal precedents in the relevant areas, and extrapolate to what may need to happen legal-framework-wise in the future as private companies start to exploit extraterrestrial resources.</description>
      <itunes:summary>I interview Lord and Lady Saint Whitehall, two lawyers with pseudonyms, as a follow-up to Episode 27 (Stellar Scams). We discuss the Outer Space Treaty, legal precedents in the relevant areas, and extrapolate to what may need to happen legal-framework-wise in the future as private companies start to exploit extraterrestrial resources.</itunes:summary>
      <itunes:image href="http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/logo_med.jpg" />
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <enclosure url="http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/podcasts/PseudoAstro_037.mp3" length="29725398" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid>http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/media/podcasts/PseudoAstro_037.mp3</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:duration>49:36</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:keywords>astronomy, pseudoscience, scams, space law, moon</itunes:keywords>
    </item>
...
  </channel>
</rss>
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nigel on May 25, 2012, 07:12:28 PM
Luckily, we enjoy beer.  Lady is the talker and the brains of our operation.

Hope everyone enjoyed it.  I always think I sound like a goof.  Lady is brilliant as is her way.

Like folks from the forum is coming into focus. Does your wife post?

Nope. I just post.  Not nearly as much as I used to do. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 26, 2012, 03:18:26 PM
The point was raised that I could/should make a poster to advertise the podcast (specifically to hang at work, but I could make it available for anyone to print and distribute ;) ).

Anyone have opinions on what should go in it, how it should be designed ... want to do a mockup? :D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nigel on May 27, 2012, 12:01:06 AM
The point was raised that I could/should make a poster to advertise the podcast (specifically to hang at work, but I could make it available for anyone to print and distribute ;) ).

Anyone have opinions on what should go in it, how it should be designed ... want to do a mockup? :D

My advice is to avoid the use of any atom diagram.  It serves the SGU and Skepchick well, but it is a well beaten horse at this point.  I like the poster idea. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 27, 2012, 12:03:34 AM
Pffft - the Rutherford model is SO 100 years ago.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: seaotter on May 27, 2012, 08:12:55 AM
How about incorporating Hoagland getting speggetified?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: quirk3k on May 28, 2012, 04:01:05 PM
I don't know this is just off the cuff, but how about something with a red flashlight.

Shining a light of reason that won't ruin your low light adjusted eyes ;)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 29, 2012, 04:52:08 AM
Guess it's better to end a day and get this right before bed than start a day with it:

Quote
Thanks so much for your proposal. Unfortunately we will not be able to offer you a slot at this year's TAM.  We had 21 worthy proposals and only six available slots- it is with regret we could not offer you time to present on this timely and fun topic.

I had kinda stopped holding out hope, but when you get the rejection you realize that you still had had some.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: quirk3k on May 29, 2012, 07:32:06 AM
Sorry to hear that. You would have done a great job.  >:(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nigel on May 30, 2012, 08:48:26 PM
That's a shame.  It will give you more time to hand with Karl.  :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on May 30, 2012, 08:52:20 PM
"Time to hand with Karl?"  I actually have yet to get confirmation he's going, though I last asked maybe 2 months ago.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nigel on May 30, 2012, 11:12:26 PM
I meant "hang."  oops.

I thought he was going.  I could be wrong. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: mindme on May 31, 2012, 08:40:25 AM
Still up in the air. Prospects are dimming to get a real live human female GF by summer. If I managed that trick, my holiday budget would be spent on one or more romantic get aways. Not that TAM is not without its romantic aspects. Ever let Shermer pat your ass? Still, a shame to let all those novelty "swinger" cards I got all printed up go to waste :(
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: Nudger1964 on June 01, 2012, 10:29:52 AM
Really enjoyed episode 37.
I really cant understand why the Outer space treaty isnt a wider topic of conversation given whats happening with commercial space operations.
Clearly in practice resources that you gather from off world are in the real world yours to own. The real issue is that if the treaty is completey ignored in that regard, how can we hope it can be worth anything in its wider context, that you cant claim other worlds as territory.
I would really like to see this addressed. I would like a new treaty (or amendment) that acknowledged the right of anyone to occupy an off world enviroment, to exploit its resources for personal gain, but also uphold the principle that land off world cannot be owned.
But there are other aspects of the treaty that need to be maintained, such as polluting an enviroment before sufficient study has been made for scientific understanding eg we have to know there is not native life on Mars before we relax restrictions.
Maybe a licence to do any of the above from space capable nations and private organisations?
Most of us want there to be bases on the moon, and Mars, but we need that to be facilitated while maintaining the spirit of the treaty to stop any claim of sovereignty and protect sites of scientific importance.
In the long term, even sovereignty will have to be address should we reach the point of civilian colonies moving off world.
Im pretty sure that a framework agreement for a path to territorial sovereignty will have to be in the hands of the first civilian off world settlers when they leave.
This is more pressing than it might appear. As soon as a commercial company has the ability to carry humans into orbit, then there are other organisations in waiting that will be wanting to put bases on the moon. Its not science fiction anymore, so it needs to be addressed IMO
While they are at it, they might as well consider allowing for nuclear weapons to be used for Asteroid defence. At some point we will need to test such a defense, so that will mean Nuclear tests in space. Its a difficult subject, but with an open program between existing Nuclear powers it shouldnt be beyond them to come to agreement. It at least should be discussed with a view to incorperating a strategy into a legal framework.
The concern here is that sooner or later the US will have to effectively pull out of the existing treaty, either formally or through actions, and then there will be no treaty at all - outer space becoming a new wild west.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: mindme on June 01, 2012, 08:07:42 PM
I wonder if such a treaty could be signed today.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #37: Space Law Follow-Up
Post by: astrostu on June 01, 2012, 08:09:37 PM
I'd say it's doubtful, but I'm a pessimist when it comes to politics these days.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 02, 2012, 12:42:36 AM
Episode 38 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_038.php) has been posted.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: mindme on June 02, 2012, 10:17:31 AM
I noticed NASA has asked other moon explorers to keep away from Apollo sites. Clearly they don't want people disturbing the sites or, hell, even looting it for souvenirs! But I can well image the moon hoax freaks are reading this as they don't want others to discover their dummy sites they set up to fool people with telescopes and stuff.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Nigel on June 04, 2012, 04:19:57 PM
Karl

Was there not a tv show starring Andy Griffith running a salvage company to retrieve material from the Apollo landing sites?

I doubt a new treaty could be cobbled together now that exploitation rather than exploration is at stake.  It's likely every space ferring nation for itself.

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Nigel on June 04, 2012, 06:27:14 PM
Stu,

The latest episode was really good.  I basically followed the all the chemistry, which is an impressive achievement. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 04, 2012, 06:32:46 PM
The latest episode was really good.  I basically followed the all the chemistry, which is an impressive achievement. 

Good to know!  Rachael was pretty worried.  I actually didn't follow it at a few points which is why I had her repeat some of it.  Those points where I was like, "Okay, is this what you said ...?" were real. :)  You should tweet to her if you haven't that you followed it all:  @katsudonburi
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Nigel on June 04, 2012, 07:08:05 PM
done
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #38: Radiometric Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: mindme on June 05, 2012, 08:33:13 AM
Karl

Was there not a tv show starring Andy Griffith running a salvage company to retrieve material from the Apollo landing sites?

I doubt a new treaty could be cobbled together now that exploitation rather than exploration is at stake.  It's likely every space ferring nation for itself.

Yes. Salvage 1. Griffith has his own surplus space shuttle. They also hooked icebergs to water the deserts. And I think in the second season, they solved the energy crisis.

Salvage 1 (1979) - TEASER WITH OPENING (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODkJABWo08&#)

When you're 12 that was some good TV.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 09, 2012, 04:29:28 AM
Episode 39 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_039.php), slightly delayed, is now up.  W00t!  It's back to the normal format.  Next up: Crater-age dating.  I'll try to make it more interesting than it sounds ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: quirk3k on June 09, 2012, 10:11:10 AM
Yeah! Listening to it now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: Belgarath on June 09, 2012, 03:01:21 PM
woot.  Thanks Stuart.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 13, 2012, 06:48:07 PM
I have an open question for you all: Is the "Puzzler" worth doing? There's been a marked lack of participation, and none for the last one. They are usually fairly difficult to come up with, but I wanted to do them initially to increase the whole "active participation" side of podcasts between me and listeners. I can't really do it, though, if no one participates. If you haven't participated, I'm curious as to why.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: Chew on June 13, 2012, 07:38:02 PM
I have an open question for you all: Is the "Puzzler" worth doing? There's been a marked lack of participation, and none for the last one.

Sorry. I was on a 10 day camping trip. :-) Lemme catch up.

But let me add how disappointed I am in the slackers on this forum for not picking up the slack.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 13, 2012, 07:40:02 PM
But let me add how disappointed I am in the slackers on this forum for not picking up the slack.

I was afraid you died or something :(.  But yeah, not gonna comment on the above ;).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: Chew on June 14, 2012, 06:30:21 PM
Episode 39 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_039.php), slightly delayed, is now up.  W00t!  It's back to the normal format.  Next up: Crater-age dating.  I'll try to make it more interesting than it sounds ...

I have actually seen a YEC write 'how could we know the half-life of an element with a half-life of a billion years when we haven't been around for a billion years'.

For an example of what you discussed on the podcast of how half-life is calculated from decay rate, 40K has a half-life of 1.25 billion years yet a gram of it will undergo 31 decays per second. That is easily measured.

Crater-aging sounds fascinating. Can that be done with remote sensing or do you need boots on ground?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: seaotter on June 14, 2012, 06:31:21 PM
This is the first question kids ask every time I bring up radiometric dating.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 14, 2012, 06:33:16 PM
Crater-aging sounds fascinating. Can that be done with remote sensing or do you need boots on ground?

It's my day job. (http://www.colorado.edu/news/features/cu-boulder-researchers-catalog-more-635000-martian-craters)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: Chew on June 14, 2012, 06:35:57 PM
Dangit, I knew that. Stoopid brain farts.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #39: Radiometric Dating by Creationists, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 14, 2012, 06:38:21 PM
Dangit, I knew that. Stoopid brain farts.
'sok :)  I've mentioned it a few times, though really mainly in context of the exploding planet stuff.  And episode 1, I think.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 16, 2012, 03:55:53 PM
Episode 40 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_040.php) is now posted.  It's everything you never wanted to know about how it's done.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Belgarath on June 16, 2012, 04:45:58 PM
Cool, except not cool.  Now I have to go to the later movie so I can listen to this.


:(

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 16, 2012, 10:49:34 PM
"ee-o" if you're European or Carl Sagan.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 16, 2012, 11:06:12 PM
Puzzler: impact crater sizes increase with increasing mass and since asteroids are more likely to be denser than comets they will more likely make bigger craters.

If so few people participate in the puzzler then I would suggest killing it. I doubt it would adversely affect listenership.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 16, 2012, 11:07:56 PM
"ee-o" if you're European or Carl Sagan.
I'm trying to remember, but I think it might have been the only moon that Pamela has pronounced correctly on AstronomyCast.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 16, 2012, 11:14:07 PM
Oh, burn!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Nigel on June 17, 2012, 10:34:40 PM
Stuart,

It just seems that the puzzler may be more trouble than its worth.  If something strikes you from time to time as a good puzzler then by all means do it.  However, it sounds as if its a big time sink for little return or at least the return you were hoping for at the time.  If you ditch it as a regular bit I don't think crowds with pitch forks and torches will appear in Colorado chanting for retribution. 

If you want to encourage more user interaction, just show up unannounced at listeners houses around dinnertime. (I don't even know that that means.  I'm tired. sorry)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: quirk3k on June 19, 2012, 08:47:36 PM
Stuart,

I really love the show and enjoy the puzzler section, but I alway end up only thinking about it for 5 minutes or so and never following up. I listen to the show in the car usually, so I can't really take notes.

I would miss it if it was gone, but I would encourage you to stop putting in so much effort if you are not getting what you want out of that effort. The last thing I want is for you to get burn out. Again, thank you so much for all the work you've put into the show. It's really great.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 19, 2012, 08:49:59 PM
Thanks quirk3k.  Your sentiment seems to be the general response I've gotten on this matter.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Parrot on June 20, 2012, 06:37:47 AM
I love audience participation stuff, but I've only answered the puzzler when it felt like something I could reason out by myself.  If I feel like I could just look up the answer, then it doesn't feel challenging enough to interest me.  On the other hand, if I feel like I don't even know where to begin looking to answer the question, then it's too challenging.

I think it's tough to come up with something right in that sweet spot.  Maybe it would be a good idea to replace the puzzler with another audience participation segment that more people could enjoy.  I know that's not very helpful without an idea of what form that would take, but if I think of anything I'll let you know.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 24, 2012, 09:54:27 AM
Ok, I've seen power-laws for meteor magnitude vs frequency and asteroid diameter vs impact interval but what's the law for dating a surface from craters? If one surface has 50 1 km craters and another has 100 1 km craters how much older is the latter surface? How does throwing in a 8 km crater adjust the age? 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 24, 2012, 08:44:11 PM
Chew - I'll answer your question in a later Q&A (so you'll have to keep listening ...).  FYI folks, real work calls and today's episode is going to be a day or two late.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: mindme on June 25, 2012, 09:29:25 AM
Thinking about the puzzler. A comet is mostly ice. An asteroid can be metal. I'd think a big loogie of iron hitting would make a bigger crater. However, a comet is rushing towards the sun and that maybe has to be mighty fast vs what an asteroid is traveling at. A fast moving ice cube is going to make a bigger crater in the sand than a slow moving hex nut. So I'll guess comet.


Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 25, 2012, 10:46:05 AM
stu never specified their orbits so he better not invoke the "average" comet velocity against the "average" asteroid velocity or I'll report him to the Fair and Non-Pedantic Podcasting Commission.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on June 25, 2012, 10:49:43 AM
stu never specified their orbits so he better not invoke the "average" comet velocity against the "average" asteroid velocity or I'll report him to the Fair and Non-Pedantic Podcasting Commission.
I think that one should consider all standard properties of objects at Earth in this kind of puzzler.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: Chew on June 25, 2012, 11:09:59 AM
stu never specified their orbits so he better not invoke the "average" comet velocity against the "average" asteroid velocity or I'll report him to the Fair and Non-Pedantic Podcasting Commission.
I think that one should consider all standard properties of objects at Earth in this kind of puzzler.

You son of a -

That's ok. I still have an impact crater diameter trump card to play if you try to cheat.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #41: Craters and Creationism, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on June 27, 2012, 01:04:14 AM
After a two-day delay, episode 41 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_041.php) is finally up.  This one might be a bit technical - sorry if I didn't explain everything well enough.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #41: Craters and Creationism, Part 2
Post by: quirk3k on June 27, 2012, 06:49:49 PM
Yeah! I knew that nearly all craters are circular, but I didn't know why. Thanks Stu.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: astrostu on July 01, 2012, 03:58:35 PM
On time! Episode 42 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_042.php) Figure out who birthed us (are we the bastard child of the Milky Way?), what crater density is what age, and the outcome of the Puzzler Poll (and ep. 40's puzzler solution).


Edited to Add, per Chew: Sorry folks! Mistake in episode 42, puzzler solution to episode 40.  Mass goes as density, not density-cubed.  So the greater speed of the comet given the numbers I used means the comet will make the bigger crater.  It's corrected in the shownotes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: Belgarath on July 03, 2012, 12:45:09 AM
Looking forward to the TAM Meetup, just don't schedule it during the SGU dinner!!

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2012, 01:40:56 AM
Looking forward to the TAM Meetup, just don't schedule it during the SGU dinner!!

Hmmm.  Did you email me?  I figured that some people would just be open and not message me and just wait for me to announce something.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: Belgarath on July 03, 2012, 07:46:18 AM
Looking forward to the TAM Meetup, just don't schedule it during the SGU dinner!!

Hmmm.  Did you email me?  I figured that some people would just be open and not message me and just wait for me to announce something.

Well, we did exchange an e-mail discussion on your potential talk. I also tweeted at you. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2012, 01:32:44 PM
Thinking of doing my TAM 2012 meetup on Thursday evening before 7 (that's when the reception starts), and/or Saturday or Sunday evening (whenever the CosmoQuest meetup isn't 'cause it seems they've changed the day again).  Thoughts?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: Belgarath on July 03, 2012, 10:32:29 PM
Thinking of doing my TAM 2012 meetup on Thursday evening before 7 (that's when the reception starts), and/or Saturday or Sunday evening (whenever the CosmoQuest meetup isn't 'cause it seems they've changed the day again).  Thoughts?

Any of those are fine.  I'll definitely be there.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2012, 10:34:10 PM
Cool.  I already have it written into the next podcast episode:  I will be doing my much-anticipated, wanted, and desired TAM meetup on Thursday at just after 5:45.  I'll meet people outside of the Workshop 4A meeting room since that's the workshop I'm going to.  I will wear a black shirt with fluorescent petroglyphs on it looking lost and hopeful that someone will come talk with me.  I may be briefly on my iPad Tweeting about it.  I may also have chocolate as bribes.  But no, the chocolate won't be hidden in a trench coat.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: astrostu on July 04, 2012, 10:45:20 PM
Perhaps why my Sunday talk was rejected: Ben Radford is doing it.  Sigh. Next year I'll try for age of the earth versus creationism.

Also, how's Wednesday instead for the meetup?  Thursday I may have a conflict now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #42: Who's Yo' Mamma!? (Milky Way or Sag Dwarf)
Post by: Belgarath on July 04, 2012, 11:18:55 PM
Perhaps why my Sunday talk was rejected: Ben Radford is doing it.  Sigh. Next year I'll try for age of the earth versus creationism.

Also, how's Wednesday instead for the meetup?  Thursday I may have a conflict now.

Works for me sir, I'm going to be piloting in flight 197 from JFK.  I think it arrives around 1pm so anytime after that is fine.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 08, 2012, 05:12:36 PM
Episode 43 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_043.php)  More Planet X nonsense, this time with a conspiracy built-in.  There's also a puzzler and Q&A.  Now to write and record episode 44 ...


P.S. @Belgarath - my flight gets in around 2:50, meaning I miss the 2:45 shuttle, so I'll get to the hotel on the 4:15 shuttle.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: approx.purified on July 08, 2012, 06:53:25 PM
Episode 43 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_043.php)  More Planet X nonsense, this time with a conspiracy built-in.  There's also a puzzler and Q&A.  Now to write and record episode 44 ...

Just have to say how much I enjoy your podcast.  It feels like a cross between Astronomy Cast and Skeptoid which really appeals to me.  Keep up the excellent work.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 08, 2012, 06:56:09 PM
Just have to say how much I enjoy your podcast.  It feels like a cross between Astronomy Cast and Skeptoid which really appeals to me.  Keep up the excellent work.
Thanks!  I've mentioned it once or twice, but this was EXACTLY my intent going in.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: Belgarath on July 09, 2012, 09:18:32 PM
Episode 43 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_043.php)  More Planet X nonsense, this time with a conspiracy built-in.  There's also a puzzler and Q&A.  Now to write and record episode 44 ...


P.S. @Belgarath - my flight gets in around 2:50, meaning I miss the 2:45 shuttle, so I'll get to the hotel on the 4:15 shuttle.

My arrival is slightly up in the air right now, It will either be the 1pm arrival on flight 197 or possibly flight 711 arriving around 5:20pm.  I'm been sent to a meeting with the FAA legal council in DC again..  Ugh I hate those...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #40: Crater Age Dating Explained, Part 1
Post by: mindme on July 10, 2012, 08:43:43 AM
Thinking about the puzzler. A comet is mostly ice. An asteroid can be metal. I'd think a big loogie of iron hitting would make a bigger crater. However, a comet is rushing towards the sun and that maybe has to be mighty fast vs what an asteroid is traveling at. A fast moving ice cube is going to make a bigger crater in the sand than a slow moving hex nut. So I'll guess comet.

I WAS RIGHT AND DIDN'T GET CREDIT. FUCK!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 10, 2012, 12:34:25 PM
Sorry Karl, I must've missed your comment.  I can mention you in ep. 45 if it's important for you.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: mindme on July 11, 2012, 10:37:05 AM
Sorry Karl, I must've missed your comment.  I can mention you in ep. 45 if it's important for you.

It's critically important :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: seaotter on July 11, 2012, 01:28:29 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 11, 2012, 02:08:12 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
You can always go back to craters.  I did say that, and I know it's true for Mars, but I can try to find the paper to make sure it also applies to the moon (only reason it wouldn't is planet size but I don't think there's a big enough difference).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: seaotter on July 11, 2012, 02:24:41 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
You can always go back to craters.  I did say that, and I know it's true for Mars, but I can try to find the paper to make sure it also applies to the moon (only reason it wouldn't is planet size but I don't think there's a big enough difference).

Then how the hell can you have all those craters on the moon and mars cool in six thousand years? There are millions of them. Shouldn't the moon be a glowing pool of magma?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 11, 2012, 02:44:29 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
You can always go back to craters.  I did say that, and I know it's true for Mars, but I can try to find the paper to make sure it also applies to the moon (only reason it wouldn't is planet size but I don't think there's a big enough difference).

Then how the hell can you have all those craters on the moon and mars cool in six thousand years? There are millions of them. Shouldn't the moon be a glowing pool of magma?
I'm pretty sure that's one of the arguments I mentioned against YEC stuff in episode ... 41? 42?  Something around there.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: seaotter on July 11, 2012, 02:46:25 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
You can always go back to craters.  I did say that, and I know it's true for Mars, but I can try to find the paper to make sure it also applies to the moon (only reason it wouldn't is planet size but I don't think there's a big enough difference).

Then how the hell can you have all those craters on the moon and mars cool in six thousand years? There are millions of them. Shouldn't the moon be a glowing pool of magma?
I'm pretty sure that's one of the arguments I mentioned against YEC stuff in episode ... 41? 42?  Something around there.

I'll assume the answer is yes and then say great minds!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on July 11, 2012, 02:48:21 PM
Can I go back to craters? Did you say that some of the big craters on the moon would take up to ten thousand years to cool?
You can always go back to craters.  I did say that, and I know it's true for Mars, but I can try to find the paper to make sure it also applies to the moon (only reason it wouldn't is planet size but I don't think there's a big enough difference).

Then how the hell can you have all those craters on the moon and mars cool in six thousand years? There are millions of them. Shouldn't the moon be a glowing pool of magma?
I'm pretty sure that's one of the arguments I mentioned against YEC stuff in episode ... 41? 42?  Something around there.
I'll assume the answer is yes and then say great minds!
Yes ;).  The context of the paper that I was thinking of is that it was talking about how a large crater (like, 200 km) on Mars can maintain enough heat to create a hydrothermal system suitable for life for something on the order of 10,000 years.  That's why when the most recent large craters on Mars formed is an important question (and one I left out of a paper I submitted now that I think about it ... damn! that's what revisions are for).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #43: The Fake Story of Planet X, Part 3
Post by: seaotter on July 11, 2012, 03:04:03 PM
Counting as my ignorant contribution to science!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 15, 2012, 01:00:18 PM
Episode 44 (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_044.php), that I recorded almost a week ago, is up.  Independent evidence that the Apollo moon landings were real and likely landed real people.

I think I've handed out over 100 podcast business cards at TAM, which would be almost 10% (or 5%?) penetration.  Yes, I did say penetration.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 15, 2012, 01:31:55 PM
Oh, I also hobnobbed it in the speakers' reception last night with several big names (I was Dr. Karen Stollznow's "Plus One" to get in since her fiancé was also a speaker).  I gushed to people like Eugenie Scott and Brian Dunning, sucked up a bit to Ben Radford after correcting him on his talk earlier in the day, and sucked up a bit to D.J. Grothe while feeding him very rich, chocolate brownies (DEA-friendly).

Reed Esau (founder of SkeptiCamp) was helpful in this and really put in some good words for me with D.J., and there is a non-zero chance I could get some sort of speaking role at TAM next year (he told me to keep in touch with him, but you know how that goes).  I plan on contacting D.J. around November and then January.  Reed said I should do so with suggestions for a panel I could do / be on or workshop I could put together.  One idea I had was a panel or workshop on combatting young-Earth creationism from a variety of fields (i.e., me being astronomy, someone being geology, someone biology, someone chemistry, someone philosophy).

I also talked some with Dr. Ray Hall, the guy who rejected my 2012 Sunday paper session application.  His initial reaction (after saying he really didn't remember why he rejected my application), was that he had thought more people would be talking about 2012 here.  There weren't.  He also said that something that he looks for in the applications are hard data, like reader/listernship numbers, have I made an impact that can be quantified, etc.  He then acknowledged that the instructions online could be made more clear to reflect this desire (AKA, the online instructions describing what to include are pretty nonexistent).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Chew on July 15, 2012, 02:18:16 PM
Puzzler:
1. The fallacy is an enthymeme; i.e. they claim Hubble could image the landing sites when in fact it can't. At the mean distance to the Moon Hubble's resolution is 93 meters.
2. Atmospheric seeing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_seeing) limits Earth-based telescopes to about .4 arcseconds resolution. Adaptive optics can correct for atmospheric distortion. For example, the Keck telescope can achieve up to .03 arcseconds resolution, which at the mean distance to the Moon is sin(.03")*384,399,000 meters = 56 meters. The largest Apollo object soft-landed on the Moon is the descent modules which are about 10 meters in diameter.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: seaotter on July 23, 2012, 12:13:00 AM
https://twitter.com/badastronomer/status/227228864487772160
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 12:14:04 AM
Indeed.  Half-way through making a movie for YouTube for it so that I can capitalize on the traffic.  Phil's traffic has a half-life of 6 hours, and I'm already 2.5 in.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: seaotter on July 23, 2012, 12:15:44 AM
Back to work!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 02:41:15 AM
4.5-minute video has been made and uploaded to YouTube (http://youtu.be/zzCxQLCNz4A).  Original after rendering was 600MB, lowered quality to 300MB for uploading to YouTube.  HD quality at 1920x1080 pixels.  Quality on YouTube is decent and definitely gets the point across.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: seaotter on July 23, 2012, 02:50:42 AM
Richard C. Hoagland and the Ziggurat on the Moon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzCxQLCNz4A&feature=youtube_gdata_player#)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 02:57:19 AM
Well yeah, or you can just embed. :P
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Caffiene on July 23, 2012, 04:19:48 AM
*thumbs up*

I wasnt entirely sure what you meant in the blog post about the shadows and pitch-blackness, but the video made it much clearer.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Zabulon on July 23, 2012, 04:26:02 AM
Good work! Crisp, clear and to the point!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 04:29:54 AM
Thanks guys!  (Going to bed now ...)  Oh, and FYI, that sucker took about 3-4 hours to actually put together and render everything.  Blah.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Chew on July 23, 2012, 08:39:48 AM
Well yeah, or you can just embed. :P

That's a really great vid, stu! Short, sweet, and to the point, with none of your usual rambling. j/k.

Make more! Chop, chop. Today, Robbins, today.

A video of why you can see half the sky at one time and almost all of it through the course of the night would make a valuable teaching (read: Nibiru debunking) aid. Like you said, it's hard to describe verbally.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Belgarath on July 23, 2012, 08:45:28 AM
Great video.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 01:18:51 PM
Thanks folks.  BTW, there are four tiny edits that I want to make to the movie ... anyone know if it's possible to replace a YouTube video but maintain the stats of the old one?  If not, I won't upload it, if so, I will.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: seaotter on July 23, 2012, 01:47:16 PM
I think you need a link to your podcast in the description of the video.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 01:48:36 PM
P.S.  Is this worth releasing via the podcast's RSS feed (so people will be "forced" to download it if they subscribe)?  I wouldn't put it in as an episode number, I'd label it as just a pure "bonus" episode.

I think you need a link to your podcast in the description of the video.
Added it right after you put that comment in.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Belgarath on July 23, 2012, 02:03:24 PM
Definitely put it as a bonus to the podcast feed.

Also, now you know why SGU doesn't do video :)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 02:04:58 PM
Indeed.  And now you know why episode 35's video is still only half done.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: seaotter on July 23, 2012, 02:39:14 PM
Definitely put it as a bonus to the podcast feed.

Also, now you know why SGU doesn't do video :)

But they should, or hell get some super fan with editing skill to make them from the reams of good stuff in the episodes. It would be great outreach to get new listeners and actually talk to the other side.

If I search vaccinations on YouTube I should at least get the five by five turned into a YouTube video to compete with the shit!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 02:54:35 PM
The difference between me and SGU is that I'm doing 3D renderings/animation for my videos, they're doing acting and filming (at least based on the movies of theirs that I've seen).  I'm not going to say that mine is harder overall for a professional, but I think it is for me and it takes longer.

Chew's statement that I should make a video version of episode 43 is something I agree with, but pretty much the ENTIRE episode would need to be a 3D rendering/animation that I don't quite know how to do at this point.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 03:32:12 PM
What's a reasonable file size for releasing on the podcast?  I can get it down to 34 MB at 1280x720, and it looks "okay" with the worst being the animation at the beginning.  I can also do a 53MB version that looks somewhat better.  You can still tell everything you need to in the 34 MB version, but I think that the 53MB looks quite a bit better.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: DK on July 23, 2012, 03:33:55 PM
Cool video. Don't we have some animators lurking around on here who might be willing to help? I know we have some, but their names escape me at the moment.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Chew on July 23, 2012, 03:36:44 PM
What's a reasonable file size for releasing on the podcast?  I can get it down to 34 MB at 1280x720, and it looks "okay" with the worst being the animation at the beginning.  I can also do a 53MB version that looks somewhat better.  You can still tell everything you need to in the 34 MB version, but I think that the 53MB looks quite a bit better.

Can't you just put a link in the feed to the YouTube video?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 03:38:08 PM
Hmm.  Probably.  Except that I've made a few minor changes and I'd like the latest version released to the podcast.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Chew on July 23, 2012, 03:43:00 PM
Hmm.  Probably.  Except that I've made a few minor changes and I'd like the latest version released to the podcast.

That would be nice but you know what the conspiracy kooks will say if the videos don't match. I would replace the current YT with your updated one, view count be damned.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 03:46:11 PM
There were four alterations:  Fixed one frame that had a bad transition, added text-over when Hoagland states that the feature is subtle, added shadow on text for the "disclosetv" link so it's more visible, and added the exact coordinates of the feature to the caption when zooming in on the location.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Belgarath on July 23, 2012, 04:03:36 PM
Stu,

If you can just keep it under 100MB, I think it would be fine.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: Caffiene on July 23, 2012, 07:58:51 PM
If you can just keep it under 100MB, I think it would be fine.

+1

53MB is more than reasonable. I download audio-only podcasts that are bigger than that.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #44: Independent Evidence for Apollo Landings
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2012, 08:14:23 PM
Alright, I'll try to get it out tonight or early tomorrow.  Still need to do tomorrow's normal episode ...

And for future reference, the half-life of traffic generated from Phil blogging about you is around 6 hours, but tweeting about you is about 1-2 hours.  Oh well.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 02:21:02 AM
The moon's changing recession rate, episode 45, has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_045.php)

I also re-posted the video to the feed after spending most of today to add another minute and 4 seconds of footage.  I also put up a shownotes page for it on the website. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_B01.php)  This time, despite using the same compression size, it came out to about 97 MB ... still under your 100 MB "limit."  I'm asking for feedback on it from people in general ... if you folks want to critique the latest additions (starting around 3 min 30 sec), please do so.

I already know that there are a few awkward points during the narration, but I'm not re-doing it again.  I tried VERY hard to keep to the same time for the first 3.5 minutes because, otherwise, it would have required re-doing the timing on all the animations.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: Ravenhull on July 25, 2012, 09:36:31 AM
Just watched the Hogland video.  Has anybody made an effort to analyze the angle and such to see if the alledged structure is a) the size claimed, and b) positioned in such a way that it would be upright?  The reason for b) is that a bad job could have resulted in this thing apparently sitting perpindicular to a slope that it was shopped onto or other such flaws.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: Belgarath on July 25, 2012, 10:01:19 AM
So wait, now I need to figure out what these weird stories about you at TAM are that I need to disbelieve :)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 01:40:20 PM
Ravenhull - I get roughly the same size Hoagland claims.  As to it being upright, it's sorta on that hill where "X" marks the spot due to shadows that I show in the WAC and NAC, so it'd be mostly upright if it were to exist.  At least as upright as I can tell.

Belg - none that I know of, but just in case ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: Chew on July 25, 2012, 02:35:04 PM
I'm a partial winner! Woo hoo!

GoneToPlaid is most definitely from Spaceballs. His avatar is a picture of John Candy from the movie. He has tons of great videos debunking the hoax claims. I'm glad to hear he listens to the podcast. You should tap his brain when you want to do more Apollo hoax episodes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 02:36:18 PM
Yeah, I'm just trying to figure out if he and Phil are the same person.  I keep forgetting to ask.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: Chew on July 25, 2012, 02:49:25 PM
Yeah, I'm just trying to figure out if he and Phil are the same person.  I keep forgetting to ask.

Say what? Never heard that before.

Sagan addressed some of Velikovsky's claims in one of his books, including the claim that Venus swung by the Earth and caused it to stop spinning and that this was documented during the Biblical siege of Jericho when Joshua commanded the Sun to stand still. Sagan calculated the amount of heat that would have been released if the Earth stopped spinning and then started spinning again. You should cover that in your Velikovsky episode. You should also discuss the gigantic cult that rose up around him, including many in academia. He is also freuqently described as a scientist when he was not.
 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 02:53:16 PM
Yeah, I'm just trying to figure out if he and Phil are the same person.  I keep forgetting to ask.
Say what? Never heard that before.
Phil = Phil Karn (or Kahrn or something like that).  He's been on my blog A LOT and responds whenever the crazies post in my posts on the moon hoax.  Not talking Phil Plait.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: Belgarath on July 25, 2012, 03:15:32 PM
Belg - none that I know of, but just in case ...

Hmm, Now, I'm thinking that you probably DID do something weird but you're trying to insulate yourself against witnesses.  Curiouser and Curiouser...  (j/k)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: quirk3k on July 25, 2012, 07:57:28 PM
The updated video would not copy over to my iPhone 4 (not an iPhone 4S). The first video worked fine, it was the update that failed.

(http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/534/screenshot20120725at745.png)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 08:09:18 PM
Hmmmmm.

It uploaded fine to my iPad.  Could it be the resolution?  Apple says it supports H.264 video up to 1080p, this was H.264 in MP4 format at 1920x1080 so I thought that'd work.  I don't suppose you have any idea why it won't copy?  I swear I encoded it the same way as the previous version ...
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: quirk3k on July 25, 2012, 08:27:33 PM
Hmmmmm.

It uploaded fine to my iPad.  Could it be the resolution?  Apple says it supports H.264 video up to 1080p, this was H.264 in MP4 format at 1920x1080 so I thought that'd work.  I don't suppose you have any idea why it won't copy?  I swear I encoded it the same way as the previous version ...

The first version of the video as 1280x720.

I poked around and found iPhone 4 Tech Specs (http://www.apple.com/iphone/iphone-4/specs.html)

Quote
Video formats supported: H.264 video up to 720p, 30 frames per second, Main Profile Level 3.1 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;

Looks like it's a problem in the iPhone 4 and lower.

The 3GS (http://www.apple.com/iphone/iphone-3gs/specs.html) is even worse.

Quote
Video formats supported: H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 08:29:52 PM
Alright, I must've done 1920 the first time, then re-converted to a different bit rate and it went back to 1280 by default and I didn't realize it, and then I remembered to do 1920 when I did it for realz with the second version.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: astrostu on July 25, 2012, 08:44:45 PM
Alright, if you delete the one you have and re-download it, I've changed the resolution to 1280x720.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #45: The Moon's Changing Recession Rate
Post by: quirk3k on July 25, 2012, 10:45:31 PM
It worked!

(http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/2533/img1877n.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 02, 2012, 05:00:05 AM
W00t!  One year in, around 1000 listeners per episode.

First anniversary episode is now posted, Immanuel Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision." (http://podcast.sjrdesgin.net/shownotes_046.php)  It might get a bit preachy at times, but it was hard not to given the subject matter.  I can understand why he's the hero of "amateur scientists" today.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: mindme on August 02, 2012, 11:17:43 AM
A FB friend was extolling Zecharia Sitchin's books from the early 70s and 80s and implying maybe we were in for a Nibiru smack down in 2012. No amount of science seemed to be able to dislodge him from his belief. I found it interesting he kept coming back to one big point: Sitchin's books had ideas about the moon and Mars (e.g., water on the moon and Mars) that were years ahead of its time. Science scoffed at these ideas! Since he was right about so many things that science scoffed at, maybe we should be listening now!

I pointed out to him everything Sitchin claimed in the 70s and 80s were ideas already established in the scientific literature but had not made it into the popular press or the public conscience. Any astronomy buff would know this stuff, however. It's a familiar bell rung. Billy Meier followers do the same. Meier knew about x before science. When you look, if it's not some generalized poetry hammered to fit new date, it's Meier just reflecting the contemporary science.

I think the only success I had with my FB friend was showing him the real science literature pre-dated Sitchin claims. That gave him pause for thought.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: ShadowSot on August 03, 2012, 11:56:34 PM
 Yeesh, waited so long for this and I dunno... now I feel...

 Enlightened. :)
 Great episode, well worth the wait.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 04, 2012, 12:14:14 AM
Yeesh, waited so long for this and I dunno... now I feel...

 Enlightened. :)
 Great episode, well worth the wait.

Really?  I wasn't sure how people would respond to this episode.  Only half of it is Velikovsky, the rest is a commentary on how not to do science.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 07, 2012, 03:38:25 AM
Mike Bara claims to have p0wned me in my analysis of the lunar ziggurat. (http://wp.me/pjMYE-n8)  Instead, I show in a 4800-word post that Mike addressed less than half my points, is a name-caller and not much else, does not understand image compression, nor does he understand the JPG file format.  Nor basic image analysis beyond an armchair photoshop player.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: Belgarath on August 07, 2012, 08:33:35 AM
Mike Bara claims to have p0wned me in my analysis of the lunar ziggurat. (http://wp.me/pjMYE-n8)  Instead, I show in a 4800-word post that Mike addressed less than half my points, is a name-caller and not much else, does not understand image compression, nor does he understand the JPG file format.  Nor basic image analysis beyond an armchair photoshop player.

Big Astronomy must pay by the word, am I right?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 07, 2012, 12:25:13 PM
I warned you it was a long post.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: Belgarath on August 07, 2012, 12:26:20 PM
I warned you it was a long post.

It was a good post.  I was just poking you a bit about your ties to big astronomy.  After all you are the Astronomer Royale of Karl or something like that.  Definitely a Big Astronomy stooge :)

Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 07, 2012, 06:59:55 PM
Thanks Belg.  And no, I make little money as a NASA stooge.  None, actually.  But, the good news is that if I ever get to Phil's level, I've not seen the "NASA hush money" line on my IRS forms so I shouldn't have to pay taxes on it.

In other news ... Trying to decide what to do with this and the next few episodes.  This "Image Processing and Anomalies" episode is turning out to be way long, and it's only a Part 1.  After writing that very long 5000-word blog post last night that gets into some nitty-gritty details of image analysis, I'm going to hold off on that until a Part 2.

I was thinking of doing a video companion to this episode to show off the most important stuff visually.  But there isn't going to be a lot of visual stuff in this episode, it turns out (even though it is image processing and anomalies).  There should be more in the Part 2.

So, do I put off the Billy Meier episode until the end of August and do a Part 2 next episode, then put out a companion video that combines the most important parts of both, do I separate Part 1 and 2 in time with some intermediate episodes so's not to bore everyone, do I do two separate videos ... so many permutations.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: Belgarath on August 07, 2012, 08:37:16 PM
Well, speaking just for me, do Billy Meier, you can't go wrong with loony space alien believers.

Speaking of which, in your last post (and I'll try to remember to go put this on the blog) you indicated that all Martian craters above a certain size leave a mountain in the middle.  Is that true of the moon too?  Does the body have to be in a certain size range for craters to form that way?  Is the mountain basically happening because the surface liquifies and plops back up like what happens with a rock in water?

Anyway, again speaking for myself, I would want part 1 and 2 closer together rather than farther apart.  Mainly because if you spread them out, I'm going to have to go back and listen to the first one again to refresh my memory on the topic.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: Chew on August 07, 2012, 09:13:16 PM
Yes, Stu wrote,

Quote
Look at any reasonably fresh crater larger than 15 km on the Moon and you’ll see a central peak. Same with Mars (but the cut-off there is ~6 km as I mentioned). Link (http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com/)

Tycho on the Moon! My favorite crater in the Solar System.
(click to show/hide)

And I agree, more Billy Meier!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: ShadowSot on August 08, 2012, 04:10:21 AM
Yeesh, waited so long for this and I dunno... now I feel...

 Enlightened. :)
 Great episode, well worth the wait.

Really?  I wasn't sure how people would respond to this episode.  Only half of it is Velikovsky, the rest is a commentary on how not to do science.
Oh yeah, I tried looking into Velikovsky myself, and so I fully understand tackling one part of his claims at a time, especially after how they've been co-opted into the Electric Universe stuff, which is what I originally emailed you about (And was promised that it'd be in February, but hey, August is close.)

  It's thick and complicated, and I enjoyed the first stab into it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: astrostu on August 08, 2012, 04:12:31 AM
(And was promised that it'd be in February, but hey, August is close.)
It was originally scheduled for February.  I kept pushing it back and back and back 'cause it was such a huge topic.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast ¡FIRST ANNIVERSARY! #46: Immanuel Velikovsky
Post by: ShadowSot on August 08, 2012, 04:52:41 AM
(And was promised that it'd be in February, but hey, August is close.)
It was originally scheduled for February.  I kept pushing it back and back and back 'cause it was such a huge topic.
I hope you got I wasn't being serious there. And yeah, it's a huge topic. Rogue planet sized even.
 And since my confidence on my astronomical knowledge extends to "stars are giant burning balls of gas," which is wrong, I figure I'll wait patiently until the awesomely cool astronomer dude could explain it to me.

 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #47: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on August 08, 2012, 09:03:57 PM
Episode 47, Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 1, is out. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_047.php)  None of the recent stuff on the blog, 'cause to go there you need the 45 minutes of basics that I go into in the episode.  Hopefully it's not too boring.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #47: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 1
Post by: Ravenhull on August 09, 2012, 08:48:59 AM
Pretty good, explaining the subject in a way that I, with only a curtsury familiarity with imaging technology, could follow and understand.

A minor tangent, I wonder if if Hogeland even believes half the things he says these days or he's just a tremendous attention hog.  Something tells me that he honestly believed his early stuff like the face on Mars, but now is trying to pull more and more from his assorted orifaces in order to stay 'relevent', and thus have people pay attention to him.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #48: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on August 16, 2012, 11:37:29 PM
Episode 48 is up. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_048.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #48: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 2
Post by: seaotter on August 18, 2012, 07:37:01 PM
255 Shades of Gray? Shit I'm way behind in that series!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #48: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on August 20, 2012, 06:13:46 PM
255 Shades of Gray? Shit I'm way behind in that series!
256
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #48: Image Processing & Anomalies, Part 2
Post by: quirk3k on August 20, 2012, 08:33:01 PM
255 Shades of Gray? Shit I'm way behind in that series!
256

254 shades of gray, 1 pure black, and 1 pure white  >:D

Or it that 65534 shades of gray, 1 pure back, and 1 pure white  >:D >:D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast #49: Billy Meier, Michael Horn, and Apophis
Post by: astrostu on August 25, 2012, 02:18:19 AM
49 is up on the specific prediction supposedly made by UFO-contactee Billy Meier. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_049.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 122: Comet 67P/C-G and Rosetta Conspiracies
Post by: astrostu on December 17, 2014, 01:48:40 AM
Wow, looks like 18 months of posts here were lost.  Sad  :'(.  At least the thread still exists?

Conspiracies of
Comet 67P ...
Few, but they are weird.

Episode 122, "Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko and Rosetta Conspiracies," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_122.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 122: Comet 67P/C-G and Rosetta Conspiracies
Post by: Desert Fox on December 27, 2014, 03:41:18 AM
A bit behind in my podcasts because have been going through a Teaching Company course on Ancient Egypt.  About halfway through your latest podcasts. Everything needs to have some deeper meaning with some people. I think we all may be guilty of it but some people take it to bizarre levels.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 123: The (Pseudo)science of Communication w/ ET
Post by: astrostu on January 01, 2015, 04:42:28 PM
Karen Stollznow talks
'Bout the issues of ET
Communication.

Episode 123, "The Science and Pseudoscience of Communicating with Aliens," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_123.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 123: The (Pseudo)science of Communication w/ ET
Post by: DK on January 15, 2015, 08:15:50 AM
The latest episode of Big Picture Science deals with communicating with aliens. Apparently SETI had a big chin-wag on the subject back in December.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 123: The (Pseudo)science of Communication w/ ET
Post by: mindme on January 15, 2015, 09:14:24 AM
I thought the babel fish was a wonderful satire on the suspension of disbelief required for the whole universal translator thing. No matter what we think up, it will eventually look silly to a future generation. So, in for a penny, in for a pound. Let's just devise a very silly universal translator. And then, of course, there's all the technical problems. So Adams just posits the babel fish was created by an all powerful god for the express purpose of facilitating communication between alien races. There can be no debate about how it can't possibly work. "What, you don't think an all powerful god can make it work?"

TNG also had a great ep about the problem of translating metaphors. What happens when a language is just metaphors? Hence, the Darmok.

http://www.treksinscifi.com/forum/index.php?topic=4202.0 (http://www.treksinscifi.com/forum/index.php?topic=4202.0)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 124: The Astronomical Distance Ladder
Post by: astrostu on January 17, 2015, 02:15:46 AM
Measuring distance
In the Universe: A fun
Science episode!

Episode 124, "The Astronomical Distance Ladder," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_124.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: astrostu on February 02, 2015, 01:37:24 AM
Black holes: Are these dense,
Massive objects for realz, or
Are they just Sci Fi?

Episode 125, "The Big Bang Conspiracy," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_125.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: Desert Fox on February 05, 2015, 08:44:53 PM
Black holes: Are these dense,
Massive objects for realz, or
Are they just Sci Fi?

Episode 125, "The Big Bang Conspiracy," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_125.php)

I have a question. . . .To paraphrase a bit, you state that the only thing small enough and massive enough to explain the orbits in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is a black hole. I know it would collapse into a black hole but what would be the radius of a theoretical neutron star with the mass of a supermassive black hole?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: astrostu on February 05, 2015, 09:30:40 PM
Wikipedia says, "Neutron stars have overall densities of 3.7×10^17 to 5.9×10^17 kg/m^3."  Volume of a sphere = 4/3*π*r^3, density = mass/volume ...

So, if we have a mass of 4 million suns, sun = 2*10^30 kg, then we need a mass of 8*10^36 kg.

Got mass, got density, solving for volume: V = mass / density (choose average density of around 5*10^17 kg/m^3 ==> V ≈ 10^19 m^3.

Got volume, solve for radius:  r = (3/(4*π) * V)^(1/3) ≈ 10^7 m.

Our sun is about 7*10^8 m in radius.  Earth is around 7*10^6 m in radius.

So, you'd have a neutron star that's maybe 2 Earths across.  Most neutron stars are more like 10 km across, the size of a city.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: Desert Fox on February 06, 2015, 04:01:19 AM
I assume that Mike Bara is not claiming that we have something like a supermassive neutron star / quark star instead of a supermassive black hole? Of course, if he did make that claim, he would still need to explain why neutron / quark pressure holds the star from further collapse.

Edit: I believe that there are some astronomers who argue that there are no black holes but instead are quark stars. I believe though they are only arguing about regular black holes, not sure what they are arguing as far as supermassive black holes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: astrostu on February 06, 2015, 12:00:38 PM
Reading Mike's stuff, makes me think that he is very similar to Ken Ham in his denial of black holes versus Ken's denial of any kind of history or archaeology or geology past a few hundred or thousand years. They really do sound similar in the sense that they say, well, how do you know since nobody's there to actually observe it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: Desert Fox on February 06, 2015, 12:58:52 PM
I suspect he just does not understand either. For example, I believe he attacks scientists with regard to dark matter as well not realizing that it is really a place holder. If there becomes an issue with the formation of black holes, black holes would simply become a place holder until we find out what they are.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 125: The Black Hole Conspiracy
Post by: astrostu on February 06, 2015, 01:11:57 PM
He has stated that dark matter "is literally the hand of God."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 126: How Science Is Funded, with Pamela Gay
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2015, 08:01:00 PM
The sordid subject
Of the coin: How scientists
Are - and are not - paid.

Episode 126, "The Facts and Misconceptions Behind Funding in Science, with Dr. Pamela Gay," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_126.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 126: How Science Is Funded, with Pamela Gay
Post by: Belgarath on February 16, 2015, 08:28:24 PM
The sordid subject
Of the coin: How scientists
Are - and are not - paid.



From the Illuminati, Big Pharma, Big Climate and the Military Industrial complex, MIRITE?



Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 126: How Science Is Funded, with Pamela Gay
Post by: astrostu on February 16, 2015, 08:29:20 PM
The sordid subject
Of the coin: How scientists
Are - and are not - paid.
From the Illuminati, Big Pharma, Big Climate and the Military Industrial complex, MIRITE?
The MI-what now?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 126: How Science Is Funded, with Pamela Gay
Post by: Belgarath on February 17, 2015, 09:46:27 AM
Sound it out phonetically.   M-I-RIGHT
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 126: How Science Is Funded, with Pamela Gay
Post by: astrostu on February 17, 2015, 10:22:40 AM
Ah.  Clever.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on March 03, 2015, 01:23:07 AM
Great Comet Hale-Bopp,
Part 1: On the claimed photos
Of your companion.

Episode 127, "The Saga of Comet Hale-Bopp and its Fugacious Companion, Part 1," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_127.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: Desert Fox on March 08, 2015, 05:53:08 PM
I am a bit behind in my podcasts because I was listening to Bill Nye's book.
Still, I decided to listen to this one out of turn because it really interested me.
Loved the pleading when the photo was revealed to be a hoax.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: seaotter on March 08, 2015, 07:09:38 PM
Surprised how pissed the host sounded. I just figured they all knew it was fake.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on March 08, 2015, 07:10:30 PM
Art doesn't like to be lied to, and I think he thought he had been lied to.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: Desert Fox on March 08, 2015, 07:27:58 PM
Art doesn't like to be lied to, and I think he thought he had been lied to.

While some of his guests may be suffering from self deception, at least a significant number of his guests know that they are lying. Some of them may consider it to be the noble lie but others know exactly what they are doing and at not doing it for noble purposes. Was he really gullible?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 127: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on March 08, 2015, 07:32:16 PM
Art doesn't like to be lied to, and I think he thought he had been lied to.

While some of his guests may be suffering from self deception, at least a significant number of his guests know that they are lying. Some of them may consider it to be the noble lie but others know exactly what they are doing and at not doing it for noble purposes. Was he really gullible?
I really got the impression when listening to the two dozen hours of interviews that Art really thought it was real.  Or rather, that his guests were presenting him with real information that led him to think it was real.  And he got so hammered in the national media over it that that only made him hunker down even more when his guests insisted they were telling the truth.  And then the reveal of the hoax came and it all came crashing down.

That was the human-side impression I got and why I didn't take Art to task nearly as much as Chuck or I will with Courtney next episode.  I think that the only things wrong Art did was be gullible and not go to real scientists to ask them to look at the information (reporting on the debunkings and then dismissing them not withstanding - it was never an interview where he could be convinced).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 14, 2015, 11:08:04 PM
Great Comet Hale-Bopp,
Part 2: On remote viewing
The comet's partner.

Episode 128, "The Saga of Comet Hale-Bopp and its Fugacious Companion, Part 2," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_128.php)  This episode focuses on the remote viewing claims.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: Desert Fox on March 15, 2015, 04:47:34 PM
When remote viewing never passes any test, why is it taken seriously at all?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 15, 2015, 08:30:22 PM
Because they want to believe.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: Desert Fox on March 17, 2015, 12:05:12 PM
Because they want to believe.

I finished the latest podcast and it just seems like the whole remote viewing concept is so transparent.
Granted, if it actually worked, it would not matter.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 17, 2015, 12:10:39 PM
I agree that it seems ridiculous on its face.  But proving so to a person who even kinda believes in it is hard.  Even if you show that the basic idea is flawed and that most predictions / "viewings" never bear out as true, they still want to believe.  So, I chose a different tact this time and chose to show that they not only were wrong, but they lied about the method.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: Desert Fox on March 18, 2015, 04:04:59 PM
I was listening to the latest episode of Skeptics Guide to the Universe and had a thought. . . . .
We ask Remote Viewers to draw what Pluto looks like. Nobody currently really knows what Pluto looks like but we will know in June / July. Good show of how remote viewing does not show what something looks like but science does. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: astrostu on March 18, 2015, 07:26:57 PM
Try inviting some to do it. :)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 128: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 2
Post by: Desert Fox on March 20, 2015, 02:06:34 PM
Try inviting some to do it. :)

You are the one who has been on Coast to Coast  ;D

In honesty, I don't really have the contacts with that crowd anymore. Used to when I was a Wiccan but that has been years.
Somehow I get the feeling that they would try to dance out of it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on April 02, 2015, 01:51:43 AM
Great Comet Hale-Bopp,
Part 3: The cult members' death
And continued bull.

Episode 129, "The Saga of Comet Hale-Bopp and its Fugacious Companion, Part 3," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_129.php)  This episode focuses on the remote viewing claims.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: Desert Fox on April 03, 2015, 10:29:49 PM
How do you know that they really did not go to a higher plane? Don't you hate those unfalsifiable claim.

I remember though discussing the fact that chiropractic kills a number of people per year. Remeber somebody answering me that it is such a small number.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: DK on April 07, 2015, 02:20:54 PM
Have you listened to the latest episode of Be Reasonable? (http://www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk/2015/03/be-reasonable-episode-027-alan-butler/)

Reckon you could get a whole episode examining this guys claims about how the moon could not possibly be natural, but was in fact built by time travelling humans. Linky (http://www.dawnofrealization.com/).
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: astrostu on April 07, 2015, 03:23:01 PM
Lots
Have you listened to the latest episode of Be Reasonable? (http://www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk/2015/03/be-reasonable-episode-027-alan-butler/)

Reckon you could get a whole episode examining this guys claims about how the moon could not possibly be natural, but was in fact built by time travelling humans. Linky (http://www.dawnofrealization.com/).

Lots of people have pointed this out to me (Facebook, e-mail, now here :) ).  I haven't listened yet because I expect I'll want to take notes, and I normally listen during my 45-minute commute.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: Desert Fox on April 07, 2015, 04:53:40 PM
I am curious if any of them have read the Dahak series from David Weber. It is a science fiction series where the moon is a giant battle station.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 129: The Comet Hale-Bopp Saga, Part 3
Post by: DK on April 08, 2015, 08:16:31 AM
Lots
Have you listened to the latest episode of Be Reasonable? (http://www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk/2015/03/be-reasonable-episode-027-alan-butler/)

Reckon you could get a whole episode examining this guys claims about how the moon could not possibly be natural, but was in fact built by time travelling humans. Linky (http://www.dawnofrealization.com/).

Lots of people have pointed this out to me (Facebook, e-mail, now here :) ).  I haven't listened yet because I expect I'll want to take notes, and I normally listen during my 45-minute commute.

Do you drive to work? If so, I'd advise against listening to it then. You may get... distracted from the road.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 130: Dealing with Pseudoscience at Conferen
Post by: astrostu on April 16, 2015, 11:26:58 PM
The Iv'ry Tower
Of science: Who can get in,
And who remains out?

Episode 130, "Dealing with Pseudoscience at Scientific Conferences," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_130.php)  This episode focuses on the remote viewing claims.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 130: Dealing with Pseudoscience at Conferences
Post by: mindme on April 29, 2015, 08:53:15 AM
Always enjoyable to hear how science is actually done and the debate. As well, it's always nice to hear how radical ideas can be introduced and the perceived barriers aren't really there.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 130: Dealing with Pseudoscience at Conferences
Post by: mindme on April 29, 2015, 08:58:41 AM
Oh, and NASA apparently discovered warp technology because errr EM drive 'n' lasers! So. Get your silver space man suit ready, Stu. You'll be science officer on a new NASA galacticruise starship pretty soon. Because EM drive 'n' lasers! Lasers!

Yes?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 130: Dealing with Pseudoscience at Conferences
Post by: astrostu on May 03, 2015, 02:07:56 AM
I address the warp drive on this episode, #131.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: astrostu on May 03, 2015, 02:09:44 AM
Blood moons, science cash,
And spacecraft conspiracies
Are topics du jour.

Episode 131, "Clip Show #3: Blood Moons, Ceres' Bright Spots, MESSENGER's Death, and Funding in Science Follow-Up," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_131.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 130: Dealing with Pseudoscience at Conferences
Post by: mindme on May 04, 2015, 09:09:23 AM
I address the warp drive on this episode, #131.

I was hoping you would.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: astrostu on May 04, 2015, 11:32:06 AM
I address the warp drive on this episode, #131.
I was hoping you would.
Hard not to when so many people were asking about it.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: Desert Fox on May 12, 2015, 08:12:47 PM
It seems to be something the anti-science people harp on
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: astrostu on May 12, 2015, 08:23:59 PM
Every few days now for the last 2 weeks, I find a new article on a news site that's debunking this.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: Desert Fox on May 12, 2015, 08:30:09 PM
I believe you compared it to the FTL neutrinos and that is something I already did prior to listening to your podcast.
had similar arguments when that came out with a science denier. . . . A real asshole Jehovah Witness actually.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 131: Clip Show #3 - Eclipses, Ceres, Funding
Post by: astrostu on May 26, 2015, 01:40:10 PM
In Search: Planet X.
An overview of common
Ideas about it.

Episode 132, "In Search Of Planet X (Live from Denver ComicCon)," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_132.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 132: In Search Of Planet X (Denver ComicCon)
Post by: astrostu on June 02, 2015, 11:01:45 PM
Ununpentium's
Existence: Does it save Bob
Lazar's U'FO claims?

Episode 133, "Element 115 and the Credibility of Bob Lazar's Claims," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_133.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 133: Element 115 and Bob Lazar
Post by: mindme on June 03, 2015, 09:13:29 AM
Lazar seems to have retreated from the world of UFOlogy these days. For a long time George Knapp seemed to be what M1chael H0rn (name obscured for reasons obvious to anyone who has to deal with him parachuting into convos) is to B1lly Me1er. People did a lot of work to show Lazar's claims of higher education were bogus, his job was just some temp work, etc. Knapp seemed to bend over backwards to weave massive conspiracy theories to explain why the evidence Lazar was king bullshitter was all some massive government plot.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 133: Element 115 and Bob Lazar
Post by: astrostu on June 03, 2015, 11:41:17 AM
Exactly.  You may have caught a few very, very hidden references to Hr0n/M€yer in there when I was referring to "other UFO" people who do the exact same thing.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 133: Element 115 and Bob Lazar
Post by: Desert Fox on June 05, 2015, 04:41:23 AM
My thought when I heard about predicting Element 115 was pretty much "So what."
Unless is was stable over the course of several thousand years, I did not see it as anything too interesting.
I predict an Element 128 right here and now.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: astrostu on June 23, 2015, 05:16:59 AM
The Big Bang theory:
Tot'ly explains the cosmos?
Or, is it a dud?

Episode 134, "Big Bang Denial," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_134.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: Anders on June 28, 2015, 04:28:00 PM
However, in another entry Conservapedia accepts (http://www.conservapedia.com/Fine_tuned_universe) the Big Big model.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: astrostu on June 28, 2015, 05:36:23 PM
Because consistency is for atheists.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: Desert Fox on July 01, 2015, 04:32:27 PM
I have heard a couple of times, including on your podcast, about older stars with a higher metallicy?
Is there any good sources on that?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: astrostu on July 01, 2015, 10:07:24 PM
I have heard a couple of times, including on your podcast, about older stars with a higher metallicy?
Is there any good sources on that?
This looks like one paper. (http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/591/2/925/fulltext/57295.text.html)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: astrostu on July 01, 2015, 10:08:24 PM
How New Horizons'
Imaging team works with the
Spacecraft photographs.

Episode 135, "How New Horizons Takes Photographs, Interview with Dr. John Spencer," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_135.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 134: Big Bang Denial
Post by: Desert Fox on July 02, 2015, 08:37:35 AM
I have heard a couple of times, including on your podcast, about older stars with a higher metallicy?
Is there any good sources on that?
This looks like one paper. (http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/591/2/925/fulltext/57295.text.html)

Thank you
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Anders on July 03, 2015, 03:17:07 AM
Carbon isn't a metal. What do they mean?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2015, 08:00:08 AM
Carbon isn't a metal. What do they mean?
To astronomers, everything heavier than helium = "metal."
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Desert Fox on July 03, 2015, 12:31:25 PM
Carbon isn't a metal. What do they mean?
To astronomers, everything heavier than helium = "metal."

Does Lithium and Beryllium get counted as a metal for this? I believe I have read that both fuse before hydrogen or helium and produced by the Primordial nucleosynthesis.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2015, 12:39:36 PM
Yes, they do.  Hydrogen, helium, metal.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Desert Fox on July 03, 2015, 12:55:04 PM
Yes, they do.  Hydrogen, helium, metal.

Cool, I just thought they might be considered differently because their formation is believed to be different.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: astrostu on July 03, 2015, 12:56:35 PM
See:

(https://catholicsensibility.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/astronomy-periodic-table.jpg)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Desert Fox on July 03, 2015, 01:03:19 PM
Not disagreeing, just exploring the idea  ;D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Desert Fox on July 04, 2015, 05:12:46 AM
On Pluto, I noticed how much the calculated mass has been lower since I was a kid. When I was a kid, I was taught that Mercury and Pluto were around the same size. Now it is a tiny fraction of Mercury. 
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: astrostu on July 04, 2015, 01:18:48 PM
That's what happens once we finally find moons.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 135: Spacecraft Photography from New Horizons
Post by: Desert Fox on July 09, 2015, 11:24:21 AM
The anticipation of better pictures of Pluto is killing me.  >:D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 136: How Science Journalists Report Science
Post by: astrostu on July 09, 2015, 09:18:16 PM
Media embeds
On New Horizons describe
Good commun'cation.

Episode 136, "How Science Journalists Go from Scientists to the Public," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_136.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: astrostu on July 23, 2015, 10:21:48 AM
Finding age of Earth
Does not require just Rad-
ioactiv'ty.

Episode 137, "Why Earth Is Old, Without Radiometric Dating," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_137.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 11:07:50 PM
Just wanted to say that I listened to it. . . Was a bit short and nothing I did not already know.  Still it was interesting.
When you argue about how rock forms in layers, I have in the past had creationist argue about the places where due to folding it has flipped upside down.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: astrostu on July 26, 2015, 11:00:22 AM
When you argue about how rock forms in layers, I have in the past had creationist argue about the places where due to folding it has flipped upside down.
Interesting.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: Anders on August 11, 2015, 03:51:14 AM
Here's something for you. (http://krishna.org/astronomy-debunked-solar-eclipses-are-not-caused-by-the-moon/) Solar eclipses are not caused by the moon!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: astrostu on August 11, 2015, 03:52:38 AM
Here's something for you. (http://krishna.org/astronomy-debunked-solar-eclipses-are-not-caused-by-the-moon/) Solar eclipses are not caused by the moon!
Srsly?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: mindme on August 11, 2015, 10:01:55 AM
Here's something for you. (http://krishna.org/astronomy-debunked-solar-eclipses-are-not-caused-by-the-moon/) Solar eclipses are not caused by the moon!
Srsly?

Krishnas. They're fun to argue with. The "proof" creationists use to demonstrate the world is only 4,000 years old they use to prove the world is 1 trillion years old. And there was an monkey army that attacked Sri Lanka.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: Anders on August 11, 2015, 01:55:02 PM
Additionally, the Moon Landings (http://krishna.org/man-on-the-moon-a-colossal-hoax-that-cost-billions-of-dollars/) were a hoax. The Vedic scriptures state that the moon is 800,000 miles farther from the Earth than the Sun is.

Quote
Now, why do we believe the Vedic scriptures rather than the material scientists? Because the Vedic scriptures differ from the conclusions of material science in that they are not based on imperfect sensory investigation, but are apaurusa i.e., they emanate from God, who is beyond the material world. In other words, Vedic evidence stands above the defects of conditioned souls within the material world. Thus, when it comes to real scientific knowledge, the standard of Vedic authority is perfect because it originates directly from the all-perfect, omniscient Personality of Godhead.

Change a few names and you have Answers In Genesis.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: mindme on August 11, 2015, 03:23:52 PM
Bridge building attack monkeys. It really happened. Or get voted out of office.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6994415.stm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nila_%28Ramayana%29
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: Anders on August 12, 2015, 01:32:56 PM
I would also like to know why Ceti Alpha Six exploded. Does that happen often?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: astrostu on August 21, 2015, 02:03:31 AM
New Horizons' pass
Through the Pluto system: Lots
Of crazy ensued.

Episode 138, "New Horizons Pluto Encounter Conspiracies, Part 1," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_138.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 137: Age of Earth w/out Radiometric Dating
Post by: Desert Fox on August 21, 2015, 08:29:22 AM
New Horizons' pass
Through the Pluto system: Lots
Of crazy ensued.

Episode 138, "New Horizons Pluto Encounter Conspiracies, Part 1," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_138.php)

Going to talk about the same issue on the Reality Check podcast?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 138: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 1
Post by: astrostu on August 21, 2015, 11:37:48 AM
Only some of the downlink stuff.  Otherwise, the TRC stuff does not overlap.  Nor does Karl's, actually.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 138: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 1
Post by: Desert Fox on August 23, 2015, 12:35:34 PM
Finish both yours and the Reality Check podcast. . . . .Have not gotten Karl's in my feed yet.

Really cannot win with conspiracies.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 138: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 1
Post by: astrostu on August 23, 2015, 12:50:07 PM
I think Karl's busy; give it another week and I'll maybe ping him.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 138: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 1
Post by: Desert Fox on August 23, 2015, 03:13:12 PM
I think Karl's busy; give it another week and I'll maybe ping him.


It is cool. . . . .Not as if I am not a little busy myself  ;D
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 138: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 1
Post by: astrostu on August 28, 2015, 12:10:36 AM
New Horizons' pass
Through the Pluto system: Lots
Of crazy ensued.

Episode 139, "New Horizons Pluto Encounter Conspiracies, Part 2," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_139.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 139: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 2
Post by: Desert Fox on August 31, 2015, 12:24:52 PM
One thing I wish was that one of those odd shaped large Kuiper belt (such as Haumea) was within range
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 139: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 2
Post by: astrostu on August 31, 2015, 01:33:26 PM
Looks like Karl has my interview up.

One thing I wish was that one of those odd shaped large Kuiper belt (such as Haumea) was within range
Yes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 139: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 2
Post by: astrostu on September 09, 2015, 07:33:37 PM
Doomsmonth: September.
What could it bring that hasn't
Yet been wrought on Earth?

Episode 140, "Doomsmonth: September 2015," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_140.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 139: New Horizons Conspiracies Part 2
Post by: Caffiene on September 09, 2015, 07:54:50 PM
Episode 140, "Doomsmonth: September 2015," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_140.php)

Youre doing that thing of linking to the old episode again (139). FTFY
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: astrostu on September 09, 2015, 07:57:48 PM
Episode 140, "Doomsmonth: September 2015," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_140.php)

Youre doing that thing of linking to the old episode again (139). FTFY
Sigh. Could've sworn I fixed it.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: UnicornPoop on September 09, 2015, 08:40:09 PM
140 episodes! Wow! Ya know...in a universe made of mostly vacuum, barren...some hydrogen, some helium, a little bit of lithium, and 4 laws of physics (3...or 1, depending on how you count), 140 episodes is really a testament to all the complexities nature gives us.

Of course, you could have stopped at 1 episode if you invoked god.  Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: astrostu on September 09, 2015, 10:40:38 PM
That certainly would've been easier.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: Anders on September 10, 2015, 07:41:07 AM
And you know, there's actually no reason to dismiss God. Just ask DrHavoc. And sift through the 30 MB answer he writes.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: astrostu on September 10, 2015, 11:06:17 AM
I don't necessarily dismiss a deity, but I certainly see no reason why the Judeo-Christian one is deserving of praise.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: Desert Fox on September 10, 2015, 02:36:30 PM
Why don't these Doomsday prophets suggest a long period comet winging inwards from the outer solar system to hit Earth? Seems like the best explanation for why we have not seen it.   
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: UnicornPoop on September 10, 2015, 06:35:57 PM
This month there will be another blood red moon. That makes it the fourth this year and some religious prophets say this will fulfill the prophecy of end times and herald the second coming of Christ. Why? Because apparently there are four different references to a moon that will turn the color of blood in the bible. I wish I still had the link because the date 9/21/15 (or maybe it's 9/24/15) also appears in the background of some popular TV shows...which somehow lends more credence to the end times because...you know...TV.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: astrostu on September 10, 2015, 06:38:19 PM
And allegedly a Taylor Swift music video!
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: astrostu on September 18, 2015, 12:14:38 AM
Four-four-zero Hertz:
The sound of angst and control?
Or a false ideal?

Episode 141, "The Physics of the A=440 Hz Conspiracy," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_141.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 140: Doomsmonth— September 2015
Post by: Anders on September 18, 2015, 06:41:14 AM
Why don't these Doomsday prophets suggest a long period comet winging inwards from the outer solar system to hit Earth? Seems like the best explanation for why we have not seen it.

Kepler's laws say that the comet moves at snail's pace out there, picking up speed as it gets closer to the sun. We would see it long before it hit.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 141: Physics of the A=440Hz Conspiracy
Post by: Desert Fox on September 18, 2015, 02:26:57 PM
Still more believable than some planet larger than Jupiter  ???
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 141: Physics of the A=440Hz Conspiracy
Post by: Desert Fox on October 16, 2015, 09:24:55 PM
I remember a while back that  Stuart Robbins spoke about somebody suggesting that Mars would be as large as the full moon. In the sky last night, Venus, Jupiter, and Mars were all in the sky and close together. The brightness of Mar pales in comparison to Jupiter and especially Venus.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 141: Physics of the A=440Hz Conspiracy
Post by: astrostu on October 17, 2015, 12:51:40 AM
With water on Mars,
Discovered again, we look
At who did what first.

Episode 142, "Who’s on First? Origin of Ideas in Science," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_142.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 142: Who's on First? Origin of Ideas in Science
Post by: seaotter on October 17, 2015, 01:04:54 PM
Stu, what does the discovery of the acceleration of the expansion of the universe do to Hubbles law, and bye estimates of the age of the observable universe?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 142: Who's on First? Origin of Ideas in Science
Post by: astrostu on October 17, 2015, 07:29:53 PM
Stu, what does the discovery of the acceleration of the expansion of the universe do to Hubbles law, and bye estimates of the age of the observable universe?
Sorry, I don't do cosmology.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 142: Who's on First? Origin of Ideas in Science
Post by: seaotter on October 17, 2015, 07:38:00 PM
Ummm .... Dude! Youre letting me down. You better get on it. I know they aren't the smartest tools in the shed but eventually somebody is going to notice that we are fucking with our clock.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 144: Knowing About Stuff Far Away but Not C
Post by: astrostu on November 30, 2015, 11:57:07 PM
How can we know 'bout
Stuff far 'way but not nearby?
Big conspiracy?

Episode 144, "Why We Know About Things Far Away but Not Nearby, and Lots of New News," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_144.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 144: Knowing About Stuff Far Away but Not Close
Post by: astrostu on December 13, 2015, 03:25:06 AM
A round-table talk
'Tween seven New Horizons
Scientists ... 'bout stuff!

Episode 143*, "Round-Table Discussion with New Horizons Early Career Scientists," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_143.php)

*Yes, this is out of order.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 145: Modern Flat Earth Thought, Part 1
Post by: astrostu on September 05, 2016, 06:04:40 PM
Back from Hiatus!!

"Modern Flat Earth Thought"
Might be a contradiction
Of terms, but let's see!

Episode 145, "Modern Flat Earth Thought, Part 1," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_145.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 143: Round-Table Discussion with Scientists
Post by: astrostu on September 14, 2016, 06:27:51 PM
Marshall Masters' doom
And gloom from Planet X, is
Wrong, false, fake, and dumb.

Episode 146, "BONUS: Tracking Failed Planet X Predictions of Marshall Masters," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_146.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: The Latinist on September 15, 2016, 11:32:42 AM
Were you recently a guest on Cognitive Dissonance, Stu?
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: astrostu on September 15, 2016, 11:33:45 AM
Were you recently a guest on Cognitive Dissonance, Stu?
Yes, indeed.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: The Latinist on September 15, 2016, 07:21:05 PM
Were you recently a guest on Cognitive Dissonance, Stu?
Yes, indeed.

I thought that must be you.  You did a great job with Icke.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: astrostu on September 15, 2016, 08:06:49 PM
Were you recently a guest on Cognitive Dissonance, Stu?
Yes, indeed.

I thought that must be you.  You did a great job with Icke.
Thanks!  The episode I'll be putting out tomorrow or Saturday is going to get into the Icke stuff they didn't have me talk about on the show, all the reasons he put out about the hollow Earth and why they're wrong.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: The Latinist on September 15, 2016, 08:43:38 PM
Were you recently a guest on Cognitive Dissonance, Stu?
Yes, indeed.

I thought that must be you.  You did a great job with Icke.
Thanks!  The episode I'll be putting out tomorrow or Saturday is going to get into the Icke stuff they didn't have me talk about on the show, all the reasons he put out about the hollow Earth and why they're wrong.

That sounds interesting.  Sadly, I don't think I have the patience for any deeper dive into Icke.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 146: Failed Planet X Predictions
Post by: astrostu on September 17, 2016, 08:51:38 PM
The hollow Earth ... Sigh.
David Icke hasn't met a
Crazy he don't like.

Episode 147, "The Hollow Earth According to David Icke," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_147.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 147: David Icke's Hollow Earth
Post by: astrostu on September 26, 2016, 04:35:01 PM
Does discovering
X-rays from Pluto change all
We know and hold dear?

Episode 148, "X-rays from Pluto," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_148.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 149: Flat Earth Thought P2– Flags & Flights
Post by: astrostu on October 04, 2016, 01:17:00 PM
"Modern Flat Earth Thought"
On maps, flags, and airplane flights ...
Does it make sense? No.

Episode 149, "Modern Flat Earth Thought, Part 2 (U.N. Flag and Airplane Flights)," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_149.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 150: Is Dark Matter Liberal Pseudoscience?
Post by: astrostu on October 24, 2016, 01:57:44 AM
WTF is this
"Dark Matter" stuff, anyway?
Lib'ral poppycock?

Episode 150, "Is Dark Matter Liberal Pseudoscience?" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_150.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 151: Fake Story of Planet X Part X Nancy Le
Post by: astrostu on November 07, 2016, 02:09:44 AM
Nancy Leider: Still
Claiming Planet X will kill.
But ... what's "Planet Nine"?

Episode 151, "The Fake Story of Planet X, Part X - Nancy Leider Redux and Planet Nine Claims of 2016" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_151.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 152: Flat Earth Thought, Part 3 (Creationists)
Post by: astrostu on November 30, 2016, 10:44:30 PM
Wow! Young-Earth Christians
Still get some science correct:
A flat Earth is wrong.

Episode 152, "Modern Flat Earth Thought, Part 3 (Young-Earth Creationists Debunking Flat Earth)" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_152.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 153: What Is Radiation?
Post by: astrostu on December 16, 2016, 01:32:38 AM
"Radiation" is
As common in life as 'tis
In pseudoscience.

Episode 153, "What Is Radiation?" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_153.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 154: Impact Crater Pseudoscience Mishmash
Post by: astrostu on December 31, 2016, 05:42:50 PM
Impact cratering
Is neat, but crazies like to
Abuse the science.

Episode 154, "Impact Crater Pseudoscience Mishmash" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_154.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 155: New Science: Evidence for Mandela Effect?
Post by: astrostu on January 14, 2017, 07:25:37 PM
Mandela Effect,
Evidence of real'ty
Changes?  No, not quite.

Episode 155, "New Science: Evidence for the Mandela Effect?" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_155.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 156: The Scientific Method
Post by: astrostu on January 30, 2017, 05:09:22 PM
The Scientific
Method: Technique for finding
What's true, and what's not.

Episode 156, "The Scientific Method: How We Get to What We Know" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_156.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 156: The Scientific Method
Post by: daniel1948 on February 02, 2017, 05:14:45 PM
The Scientific
Method: Technique for finding
What's true, and what's not.

Episode 156, "The Scientific Method: How We Get to What We Know" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_156.php)

Hi Stuart.

Thank you for standing up against Trump's assault on science and his asinine conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 156: The Scientific Method
Post by: astrostu on February 02, 2017, 05:15:40 PM
The Scientific
Method: Technique for finding
What's true, and what's not.

Episode 156, "The Scientific Method: How We Get to What We Know" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_156.php)

Hi Stuart.

Thank you for standing up against Trump's assault on science and his asinine conspiracy theories.
:) Only the second positive response I've gotten.  (Granted, only one was super-negative, but this episode has generally lacked much feedback.)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 156: The Scientific Method
Post by: daniel1948 on February 03, 2017, 09:40:06 AM
The Scientific
Method: Technique for finding
What's true, and what's not.

Episode 156, "The Scientific Method: How We Get to What We Know" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_156.php)

Hi Stuart.

Thank you for standing up against Trump's assault on science and his asinine conspiracy theories.
:) Only the second positive response I've gotten.  (Granted, only one was super-negative, but this episode has generally lacked much feedback.)

Maybe because it was so far from your normal fare of debunking the craziest of the crazies. I find myself wondering how anybody can believe the stuff they say, and wondering if the audience of Coast to Coast listens for the comedic value of listening to nutters, or if they actually believe that stuff.

Anyway, I enjoy your show, I think mainly because it's interesting to learn what the nutters are saying. And how they can so thoroughly and completely fail to grasp the reality of things like orbital mechanics.
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 157: The Reality Check Cross-Over
Post by: astrostu on February 04, 2017, 03:23:25 PM
Altern'tive Title:
Yes, Virginia, there really
Is a Canada.

Episode 157, "Special Cross-Over Episode with The Reality Check, Astronomy Edition" has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_157.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 158: Getting Beyond the Photograph
Post by: astrostu on March 05, 2017, 04:03:54 PM
To peer beneath the
Photograph and uncover
What may be hidden!

Episode 158, "Getting Beyond the Photograph: Image Tricks with Dr. Tod Lauer," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_158.php)
Title: Re: Exposing PseudoAstronomy Podcast 159: What's a Planet?
Post by: astrostu on March 19, 2017, 09:04:26 PM
Definition of
Planet: Useful in science?
Or, just pedantry?

Episode 159, "A Proposal for the Geologic Definition of "Planet," Interview with Kirby Runyon," has been posted. (http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/shownotes_159.php)