Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Stargazing Live!

milkyjoe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Spackbackle

Spackbackle

Posted
Posted
I wonder what the conspiracy theorists say now to the Moon Landings LOL

I'm sure they would just say that the all the foot prints, tracks and debris is just photoshopped on!

A good conspiracy theorist can find a way to explain anything, even when the truth is blindinly obvious!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beamer3.6m

beamer3.6m

Posted
Posted

I'm ready for the backlash but I thought tonights programme (Tuesday) was dull asnd I turned it off before the end.

As for the general wish for more 'live' star gazing, what does that mean - watching a night vision image of stars on the TV - pretty dull I reckon! I reckon it would get very dull very quickly if they just kept pointing out constellations or showed images of wehat you actually see through a scope, it is afterall pretty much fuzzy patches which aint that interesting really unless you know what it is your looking at which therefore requires the explanation which the rest of the programme gives you.

I also thought it was a good idea to start with the moon - the fact it was not out is irrelevant as it is easy to find and easy to wow a lay audience, after all this is a beginners programme. The idea is that you watch the programme then go outside and view it, which you could in effect if you went out in the early hours.

Just my opinion, now the marksmen can take aim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stagman

Stagman

Posted
Posted
I'm ready for the backlash but I thought tonights programme (Tuesday) was dull asnd I turned it off before the end.

As for the general wish for more 'live' star gazing, what does that mean - watching a night vision image of stars on the TV - pretty dull I reckon! I reckon it would get very dull very quickly if they just kept pointing out constellations or showed images of wehat you actually see through a scope, it is afterall pretty much fuzzy patches which aint that interesting really unless you know what it is your looking at which therefore requires the explanation which the rest of the programme gives you.

I also thought it was a good idea to start with the moon - the fact it was not out is irrelevant as it is easy to find and easy to wow a lay audience, after all this is a beginners programme. The idea is that you watch the programme then go outside and view it, which you could in effect if you went out in the early hours.

Just my opinion, now the marksmen can take aim.

Well! .. I enjoyed it and managed to make a nice, hot Keema curry at the same time :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FrankieValley

FrankieValley

Posted
Posted

I missed the first half hour tonight, so maybe they did this, but I would like to see them stick video cameras down modest scopes to look at Jupiter & Venus, double stars, the moon and the like - mostly live (not moon) if possible - just to show what can be seen. Then to have a DSLR thru a modest scope aimed at M42, talk for a minute or two and then show the result. That would get some people's attention. What about sticking a phone camera down an eyepiece and showing that. Simple stuff, but stuff that can show the viewer what you really can see or capture ..... AND LIVE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Squagnut

Squagnut

Posted
Posted

I missed Monday's SGL because I was at an SGL event - it was shown on a TV in the observatory where I was, but I was outside enjoying the clear (cold!) night with my Skymax 127. Clear skies trump even Brian Cox, and I had a queue of folk all wanting a peek at various space objects. I reckon that's the best barometer of success for that kind of show - that it inspires folk to get off their backsides and have a first go at practical astronomy.

I saw most of tonight's show - cloudy here - and yes, they had learned from last year's series. E.g., I was grateful to notice that Liz Bonning has learned some adjectives other than "amazing". Heh, I was amused by Dave Culshaw's imitation of Cox, as I like that BC isn't eccentric but doesn't take himself too seriously.

As is usual with TV pop science, I didn't learn much, but I am interested in how science is presented to the public, and BC is an excellent communicator of ideas. I don't need SGL to keep up my interest, but it's a great tinderbox for igniting interest in people, especially children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
malc-c

malc-c

Posted
Posted

As for the general wish for more 'live' star gazing, what does that mean - watching a night vision image of stars on the TV - pretty dull I reckon!

That's fair comment, but where they keep banging on about trying to get joe public interested in astronomy and to go out and look at the night sky, then what better than using night vision or even feeds off cameras connected to some of the high end scopes. They have included a nice set of images taken by amateur astronomers, but why not show people the sort of kit, bit high end and low end that can be used.

To be honest I too almost turned off half way through... I didn't tune in to watch a program where 75% of the content was talking about black holes. That's what Horizon is for !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

I enjoyed tonight's programme, perhaps more so than last nights. Yes, there's a certain amount of "fluff", but (rightly or wrongly) programme-makers seem to believe that sort of stuff is necessary to draw in a larger audience. I still learnt things I didn't know about black holes because even the simple questions grew into a broader-ranging discussion. For me, Jon Culshaw brought little to the show, but I guess I'm not the target audience in that respect. (Though it was pleasant to see that BC doesn't appear to have become so up himself that he doesn't see the funny side of someone sending him up.)

Prize for the most irritating person on the show has to go to the chap at the SALT who began his response to every single question Liz Bonnin asked with "So...". You have *no* idea how much that got under my skin. By the end of that piece I was about ready to beat him to death with whatever blunt object came to hand.

I'm very interested to see how things go in Dulverton when they attempt to turn off the lights, given that it's barely ten miles away as the meteorite falls. I'd love to think that people might be persuaded that light pollution is spoiling their enjoyment of something that's completely free and wasting loads of money into the bargain, but sadly I think it's more likely there'll be loads of whiners worried about being murdered in their beds :D

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spackbackle

Spackbackle

Posted
Posted

Just caught up on tonight episode and thought it was just as good as last nights. I love that they had a section on light pollution! Shame the night vision cameras dont give a realistic view of what the dark sky looked like but I think the section made it's point.

I personally didn't mind the back hole stuff, I think alot of people new to astronomy would have at least heard the term and would be interested in what they are.

looking forward to tomorrows, I actually get whatch this one live (So far its been stargazing recorded for me)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesF

JamesF

Posted
Posted

Oh, and I should add that I'm all for BC taking the mickey out of people who don't believe in the moon landings and so on. It's about time someone had the bottle to come out and call their like fruitcakes rather than allowing them to peddle their idiocy as if it had any kind of validity (and I'll happily bundle creationists, homeopaths and a whole load of other "hard of thinking" types in with them).

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nexus 6

Nexus 6

Posted
Posted
I'm all for BC taking the mickey out of people who don't believe in the moon landings and so on. It's about time someone had the bottle to come out and call their like fruitcakes rather than allowing them to peddle their idiocy as if it had any kind of validity
could not have put it better myself! :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spikey

Spikey

Posted
Posted
Oh, and I should add that I'm all for BC taking the mickey out of people who don't believe in the moon landings and so on. It's about time someone had the bottle to come out and call their like fruitcakes rather than allowing them to peddle their idiocy as if it had any kind of validity (and I'll happily bundle creationists, homeopaths and a whole load of other "hard of thinking" types in with them).

James

LOL Perfectly put and spot on !

I'm enjoying this years a lot more than last year. Really good to see some SGLers taking centre stage on some of the broadcast images.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevetynant

stevetynant

Posted
Posted
I'd love to think that people might be persuaded that light pollution is spoiling their enjoyment of something that's completely free and wasting loads of money into the bargain, but sadly I think it's more likely there'll be loads of whiners worried about being murdered in their beds :)

James

The selfishness of old people today is just unbeleivable lol

I thought tonights programme was better than last nights- more time spent outside with the local astronomers and going to the real dark skies site- must be a nightmare for all of you living in large cities though I suspect very few of us are totally immune - mind you I'm just starting and still calling Betelguese Beetle Juice so what do I know :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pete_l

pete_l

Posted
Posted
To be honest I too almost turned off half way through... I didn't tune in to watch a program where 75% of the content was talking about black holes. That's what Horizon is for !!
Me too! :D

I watched the first series with a feeling of hope and expectation that it didn't really live up to. I watched Ep #1 of the second series with more hope and that was partially fulfilled (no JR, at least) but last night's episode was on in the background - while I did more interesting things.

I paid attention to the piece about light pollution, but Black Holes, SALT etc. just didn't do it for me.

p.s. 12 stars *inside* the Square of Pegasus? Looking at Stellarium, that makes their dark site in the high 5's - maybe pushing Mag. 6

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nebogipfel

nebogipfel

Posted
Posted

Prize for the most irritating person on the show has to go to the chap at the SALT who began his response to every single question Liz Bonnin asked with "So...". You have *no* idea how much that got under my skin. By the end of that piece I was about ready to beat him to death with whatever blunt object came to hand........

Sadly they are all doing it. It seems to have become the new fashion particularly in Science communication.

And yes, I do know how much it annoys you .........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.