Horizon Special - Transit Of Venus

[DarkerSky]

Really enjoyed the programme and its inspirational tone. I'm a Liz Bonnin fan

[DarkerSky]

No not fair comment. We rarely get anything on the TV that challenges the audience. All we ever get is a 1 hour program with 5 minutes of content with lots of very nice photography.

Why do always have to be 'entertained', how about being educated at least once in a while...?

Education is great...

Inspiration to find out more for yourself is better...

This programme fell more into the latter category, and for that I give it a big thumbs up

[Darkstar_1]

Although the programmes are interesting and in some ways educatiuonal, would the BBC not be better spending licence money on real programme content than on sending presenters to far flung corners of the world for a 30 sec slot?

[Azure]

Well it's just my opinion. If I want an educational program I can always watch national geographic/Eden/history channel etc. I don't expect most bbc programs to be educational.

[Azure]

Besides the bbc does throw out some great program's with the likes of Brian cox and David Attenborough!

[Paul Laws]

Programme was meh but Helen Czerski in a wet suit

Also, Dr Lucie can do no wrong in my eyes. Ms Bonin, however ...

Regards.

[JamesF]

Yes, I did rather get the impression that Liz Bonnin got the "dumb blonde" bits of the programme. Which is grossly unfair really, as she has a degree (in Biochemistry?) and an MSc., so is hardly underqualified to do "real science". The other two presenters didn't have to do any of the idiotic (and utterly unhelpful) CGI bits.

James

[LukeSkywatcher]

I pretty much fast forwarded through most of the programme. It wasnt really about viewing the transit at all.

[jonathan]

I found the live NASA thing on the internet more informative and entertaining, that really was about observing the transit and had all of the key science bits mentioned in the BBC programme but without the fancy CGI or unnecessary trips around the world (just one location, the best place to observe the transit from).

[dph1nm]

So my question is why put out a programme about the transit of Venus from 9-10pm on the evening when the transit actually starts at 11pm? They could have had live coverage of the start. If this had been shown a week ago then it would have made sense, but you were left wondering why tell us about this once (twice) in a lifetime event which is about to start in 60 mins, then go off air.

NigelM

[Black Knight]

I missed the programme so I can't comment on the content. Is it going up on iplayer?

Sent from my mobile using Tapatalk, so please excuse the speeling and granma!

[pel]

I missed the programme so I can't comment on the content. Is it going up on iplayer?

Sent from my mobile using Tapatalk, so please excuse the speeling and granma!

It's on tonight on BBC HD if you've got it, at 00:00 (I'm recording it)

[Peter Drew]

Worth watching, just. I kept wondering when they would mention the brief viewing opportunity afforded by the UK, , the programme gave the initial impression that the event would be visible all night.

[Auntystatic]

So Venus is very hot and has lots of pressure on the ground, so lets go up a mountain where its really cold and very low pressure to look for life that might like it there :huh: :huh:

Liz Bonnin would have been much closer to the mark if she had gone under the sea to one of the black smokers, there she would have found life that lives in extreme temeratures as high as 464 °C, under great pressure 5km below sea level and the bacteria like sulfur compounds.

Now of course I've just given away my secret plan to start terraforming Venus.

[squeaky]

So Venus is very hot and has lots of pressure on the ground, so lets go up a mountain where its really cold and very low pressure to look for life that might like it there :huh: :huh:

Liz Bonnin would have been much closer to the mark if she had gone under the sea to one of the black smokers, there she would have found life that lives in extreme temeratures as high as 464 °C, under great pressure 5km below sea level and the bacteria like sulfur compounds.

Now of course I've just given away my secret plan to start terraforming Venus.

But the one thing I tend to query about the life around these black smokers is - did life originate there or did it migrate ever closer over time from a more "normal" environment?

[JamesF]

So Venus is very hot and has lots of pressure on the ground, so lets go up a mountain where its really cold and very low pressure to look for life that might like it there :huh: :huh:

Liz Bonnin would have been much closer to the mark if she had gone under the sea to one of the black smokers, there she would have found life that lives in extreme temeratures as high as 464 °C, under great pressure 5km below sea level and the bacteria like sulfur compounds.

Now of course I've just given away my secret plan to start terraforming Venus.

That irritated me a little too, Danielle. I think it was useful in that context to justify that life can reproduce directly in the air, but they should have gone further to show that "Not only is it possible for life to reproduce in a gaseous environment, but it's also possible to live at high temperatures and pressures. Therefore it's not unreasonable to suggest that life might have evolved in the Venusian atmosphere."

James

[mindburner]

just watched this and boy was it dull. First 10 minutes was waffle on a boat. Just the usual style over content. Was the program actually about Venus and it's transit? or just a excuse for glossy landscape shots. Lots of presenter shots looking at things, and expressing their personal views. They even did the cliché route 66 desert bit, at least they didn't hire a mustang sports car

What's with the presenter on the beach? - eye candy but pretty pointless. I mean some of this is ok. You really see the extent of the quality drop when comparing it to something like the BBC series' the planets'. Although dated scientifically, the production is way ahead. I know a response maybe 'it's for the general viewer' well if this is, then it does them a great disservice. The marshmallow as a exoplanet - pleezzze

Perhaps the program could use a shorter run time if they didn't have the science to fill it. There were some interesting bits towards the end.

just my opinion though.

[Kai]

Can't really comment on it as it sent me to sleep after 10 mins

[Black Knight]

Just watched it on iPlayer. Quite enjoyed it, although I did get a little bored in places

[jamespels]

Thought it had some quite good content in places, but far too much filler. I agree some explanation of the parallax measurement process would have been good.

Overall, struck me as being a bit like the poorer Horizons of a couple of years back - covers an interesting subject but only has 15 minutes of content so everything is either repeated ad nauseum or padded out with waffle. I see I am not the only one getting fed up with shots of scientist-presenters looking wistfully up in expensive locations (though Liz Bonnin has the edge over Prof Cox for me is these shots )

[squashnut72]

I watched it with my 12 y/o lad and we both thought it was pretty good.

Can you imagine trying to make an hour long TV show about a scientific subject that is appealing, interesting and educating for the hugely wide variety of viewers for the 9-10pm BBC2 slot.

In my living room alone there was an 82 year old Daily Mail reading grandma who left school at 14, an enthusiastic hobby astronomer with a science degree, a computer game obsessed 12 year old and a slightly sleepy mum who has a pHD in immunology.

We were all fairly well entertained and interested enough to watch the whole thing without switching off so I think they did a reasonably good job.

It's very easy to say things are poor but not so easy to make TV content that will satisfy all sectors of the viewing public.

[Black Knight]

I watched it with my 12 y/o lad and we both thought it was pretty good.

Can you imagine trying to make an hour long TV show about a scientific subject that is appealing, interesting and educating for the hugely wide variety of viewers for the 9-10pm BBC2 slot.

In my living room alone there was an 82 year old Daily Mail reading grandma who left school at 14, an enthusiastic hobby astronomer with a science degree, a computer game obsessed 12 year old and a slightly sleepy mum who has a pHD in immunology.

We were all fairly well entertained and interested enough to watch the whole thing without switching off so I think they did a reasonably good job.

It's very easy to say things are poor but not so easy to make TV content that will satisfy all sectors of the viewing public.

Pretty much how I feel actually. I felt on the whole the BBC did OK with this show. At least they try ... which is more than can be said for a lot of broadcasters. In my opinion, obviously.

[cantab]

I was fascinated by the idea of analysing the signals for analysis of the Venusian atmosphere by detecting them as they bounce off the moon. Quite an astonishing idea and warranted a bit more coverage.

I'd already come across this in New Scientist, it is indeed an ingenious piece of research.

Personally I thought the general coverage was OK, and it actually taught me some stuff I didn't know (a rarity for Horizon programs on physical sciences), notably about the upper atmospheric life (I'd vaguely heard of it before). Practical advice on viewing the transit did, however, seem greatly lacking. Of course it aired rather late before the event, but pinhole projection at least would be a viable method to knock up in the evening and take out with the family at sunrise. These days it seems that TV programs just want to send you to a website for the real details.

I watched the transit in 2004, which was much more favourable for the UK, but I don't recall the BBC giving it much coverage then - let alone a whole "pop sci" programme. How typical of them to spend more time promoting the "repeat" than the original

I believe there was a lot less scientific interest in the 2004 transit, because back then the detection of extrasolar planets by transits hadn't really got going the way it is now.

[jamespels]

A very interesting article (from an historical perspective) here: http://www.classicalastronomy.com/news/anmviewer.asp?a=57&z=23. It seems to be on a religious-ish website but don't hold that against it... This is the sort of stuff (even asides like the Mason-Dixon line that divided the northern and southern US - you'll see what I mean if you read the article) that could have been included in the programme.

Some sums (or guidance on how to do the sums): http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys445/gettys/venus_ex/venus_ex.html

J.

[stonemonkeylives]

Just finished watching, thought it very poor.

More like an excuse for the presenters to jet round the world.

The key historical points of the 1769 transit were glossed over, ie mentioned the black drop but gave no explanation of it's cause and gave minimal treatment of the mathematics involved.

There were a number of items that needed a more in depth look.

Still I suppose we should be grateful that we had anything.

I must admit I thought it was ok for the general public and did explain the significance of the transit. I must agree with JamesF though, that Liz whatever-she's-called just grated on me, why was a biologist talking about an astronomical event? Her co-presenters were a lot more engaging and imho should have been the only ones presenting the show. @Astro Imp I agree and what annoyed me was that they never mentioned the mess of an attempt the transit 8 years prior to the 1769 transit had been or the fact that it was one of the first scientific events to be attempt by the global scientific community (can't remember if it was actually the first).

sent from Gherkin Muncher mk .III (commonly known as a Galaxy S2)