Author Topic: Episode #56  (Read 16944 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline reed

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Episode #56
« Reply #15 on: August 20, 2006, 12:03:25 PM »

Offline Leigh

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 91
Episode #56
« Reply #16 on: August 20, 2006, 02:16:35 PM »
Rebecca,
Praise, praise, praise....
You have added a wonderful dynamic to the podcast and I for one missed you when you took off to Europe :cry: ..just look at that sad face...see how much I missed you?

As for the criticisms of this podcast: I sincerely hope that our friend who has decided to tune out will reconsider his or her position.
The forums here very nicely reflect the spirit (if I may use that word without being jumped on?) of the podcast. And vice versa.

Once again however, we witness the inevitable...
That someone makes a choice (Yes..a choice) to be offended by all-the- wrong-things!
Come back my friend, when you are good and ready to be offended by more important things than Steve's hilarious grappling with the proper pronunciation of someone's name. My name is ALWAYS written incorrectly by others, my surname is mispronounced, but the fact is, I just have more important things to concern myself with.."Just call me whatever the hell you want, I've got a brain to fill!"
There are many people on our wee planet who, basically make it that much harder, if not impossible for the 'Bright Ship Humana' to get where it needs to go...THESE are the people who deserve your criticism. :evil:

This podcast is one of the few 'beacons of light' available to us..without them, I would surely be even more of a 'dum-dum' than I am now.
 :?
and surely, you don't want me to be a dum-dum do you???  :cry:
quot;When you hear people in church debasing themselves and saying that they are miserable sinners, and all the rest of it, it seems contemptible and not worthy of self-respecting human beings": Bertrand Russell
www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/library.html

Offline Sillysighbean

  • Triskaidekaphilic
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • http://www.myspace.com/jimpatten
good show
« Reply #17 on: August 20, 2006, 11:03:39 PM »
great podcast

Offline Joe Shmoe

  • Chief Rape Apologist
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5347
Episode #56
« Reply #18 on: August 20, 2006, 11:22:30 PM »
Jesus, how much did that cost?

Offline Sillysighbean

  • Triskaidekaphilic
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • http://www.myspace.com/jimpatten
Pins and needles, needles and pins...
« Reply #19 on: August 20, 2006, 11:29:43 PM »
It was a lot! Too bad the podcast did not exist then, I could have had it debunked for nothing instead of finding out for myself  :wink:

Offline slammermx

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 48
evolution graphic
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2006, 12:49:52 PM »
I was scouring the internet and found the article about evolution acceptance in europe and the US and visually the graphics shows how split the US is. Where the undecided hold the difference between the majority. That's probably why the Fundamentalist are so hot and heavy about pushing their agenda.

P.S. Keep up the humor no matter how juvenile.

Offline JHGRedekop

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 160
    • http://77track7.blogspot.com
Episode #56
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2006, 02:04:42 PM »
I got a chance to finish the episode today -- great interview with Ken Feder! He makes an excellent guest.

Offline Timothy Clemans

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Episode #56
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2006, 08:34:58 PM »
url=http://www.theskepticsguide.org][/url]

Offline Chris Noble

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 449
Episode #56
« Reply #23 on: August 23, 2006, 04:01:31 AM »
The idea that acupuncture has been vindicated is nonsense. Any positive study shows a fairly small effect and only for symptomatic treatment of chronic conditions.

I have had other people tell me that just because the whole theoretical basis of acupuncture with chi is crap does not mean that acupuncture is crap. The idea is that through trial and error over the millennia people could have stumbled upon the acupuncture points and then made up the theory to fit the observed results.

The major problem with that is that ancient chinese did not have any more direct access to reality than us. The effects are fairly weak and the only way to determine if acupuncture works is randomised blind trials. Compare the size of an acupuncture point to the surface are of the human body. It would have taken anybody a long, long, long time to find even a single acupuncture point let alone 365 or more.

That is not to say that stick pins in people doesn't have a physiological effect. It does. Just not what acupuncturists claim.

Offline Roy P

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 91
    • http://www.roypreston.co.uk
Episode #56
« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2006, 06:49:25 AM »
Quote from: "Timothy Clemans"
Planet theory movie clip at

I *Love* the denouement -- the final words :-)

Did they conduct the interviews in Lisa Simpson's bedroom?
Roy P

Offline Roy P

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 91
    • http://www.roypreston.co.uk
Episode #56
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2006, 07:03:57 AM »
Quote from: "Chris Noble"
That is not to say that stick pins in people doesn't have a physiological effect. It does. Just not what acupuncturists claim.

Agreed!

Earlier this year the BBC aired three 'documentaries' on alternative medicine over here in the UK. One majored on acupuncture:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4631930.stm

It was what was left out of the show that worried me. One of our newspapers featured a highly critical 'expose' of the programme backed up by doctors appearing in the show:

http://www.lablit.com/article/95

Unfortunately I can't find the appropriate link. It was fascinating.
Roy P

Offline Timothy Clemans

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
url=http://www.theskepticsguide.org][/url]

Offline Kerry Maxwell

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
    • http://www.bwanasonic.com
Episode #56
« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2006, 01:17:12 AM »
I think the humor/ skepticism (false dichotomy?) balance on the show is exactly what attracts me to this podcast. I listen to SETI Science and Skepticism, Point Of Inquiry, Science Talk, and Evolution 101. TSGTTU is a refreshing alternative format that helps break the *Spock-like* mold. The spontaneous, giggly-at-times, conversational mode of Skeptics Guide provides a nice contrast to the more *scripted* format of other science/ skeptical podcasts.

Kerry M

Offline Timothy Clemans

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
Episode #56
« Reply #28 on: August 24, 2006, 02:14:12 PM »
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/APWires/headlines/D8JMT3I00.html
Quote
Astronomers say Pluto is not a planet

By WILLIAM J. KOLE

Associated Press Writer

Enlarge this photoAP PHOTO/NASA

These images, released by NASA Thursday, March 6, 1996, show the never-before-seen surface of the planet Pluto as seen fron the Hubble Space Telescope's Faint Object Camera. Leading astronomers approved historic new planet guidelines Thursday, Aug. 24, 2006, downsizing Earth's neighborhood from nine principal heavenly bodies to eight by demoting distant Pluto.

PRAGUE, Czech Republic — Leading astronomers declared Thursday that Pluto is no longer a planet under historic new guidelines that downsize the solar system from nine planets to eight.

After a tumultuous week of clashing over the essence of the cosmos, the International Astronomical Union stripped Pluto of the planetary status it has held since its discovery in 1930. The new definition of what is - and isn't - a planet fills a centuries-old black hole for scientists who have labored since Copernicus without one.

Although astronomers applauded after the vote, Jocelyn Bell Burnell - a specialist in neutron stars from Northern Ireland who oversaw the proceedings - urged those who might be "quite disappointed" to look on the bright side.

"It could be argued that we are creating an umbrella called 'planet' under which the dwarf planets exist," she said, drawing laughter by waving a stuffed Pluto of Walt Disney fame beneath a real umbrella.

"Many more Plutos wait to be discovered," added Richard Binzel, a professor of planetary science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The decision by the prestigious international group spells out the basic tests that celestial objects will have to meet before they can be considered for admission to the elite cosmic club.

For now, membership will be restricted to the eight "classical" planets in the solar system: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.

Much-maligned Pluto doesn't make the grade under the new rules for a planet: "a celestial body that is in orbit around the sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a ... nearly round shape, and has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit."

Pluto is automatically disqualified because its oblong orbit overlaps with Neptune's.

Instead, it will be reclassified in a new category of "dwarf planets," similar to what long have been termed "minor planets." The definition also lays out a third class of lesser objects that orbit the sun - "small solar system bodies," a term that will apply to numerous asteroids, comets and other natural satellites.

advertising
Experts said there could be dozens of dwarf planets catalogued across the solar system in the next few years.

NASA said Thursday that Pluto's demotion would not affect its US$700 million New Horizons spacecraft mission, which earlier this year began a 9 1/2-year journey to the oddball object to unearth more of its secrets.

"We will continue pursuing exploration of the most scientifically interesting objects in the solar system, regardless of how they are categorized," Paul Hertz, chief scientist for the science mission directorate, said in a statement.

The decision on Pluto at a conference of 2,500 astronomers from 75 countries was a dramatic shift from just a week ago, when the group's leaders floated a proposal that would have reaffirmed Pluto's planetary status and made planets of its largest moon and two other objects.

That plan proved highly unpopular, splitting astronomers into factions and triggering days of sometimes combative debate that led to Pluto's undoing. In the end, only about 300 astronomers cast ballots.

Now, two of the objects that at one point were cruising toward possible full-fledged planethood will join Pluto as dwarfs: the asteroid Ceres, which was a planet in the 1800s before it got demoted, and 2003 UB313, an icy object slightly larger than Pluto whose discoverer, Michael Brown of the California Institute of Technology, has nicknamed Xena.

Charon, the largest of Pluto's three moons, is no longer under consideration for any special designation.

Brown, who watched the proceedings from Cal Tech, took Thursday's vote in stride - even though his discovery won't be christened a planet.

"UB313 is the largest dwarf planet. That's kind of cool," he said.

___

AP Science Writer Alicia Chang in Los Angeles contributed to this story.

___

On the Net:

International Astronomical Union,
url=http://www.theskepticsguide.org][/url]

Offline Aristide

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 2
    • http://nightnetwerk.com
Wow!
« Reply #29 on: August 24, 2006, 07:32:49 PM »
I came to make a comment about they way you all reacted to the Pluto deal but you have other things to worry about ...  Steven, Stephan, Stefan, what the F-? Nevermind  already...

Just like to say I enjoy the show, keep up the good work.