Jump to content

Banner.jpg.39bf5bb2e6bf87794d3e2a4b88f26f1b.jpg

Stargazing live 2017


northwalesparry
 Share

Recommended Posts

OH WHAT A BRILLIANT DECISION YET AGAIN BY THE BBC! 

SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE! THATS GOING TO REALLY ENCOURAGE UK OBSERVERS!

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MINDLESS ACADEMICS AND NOT VERY FUNNY IRISH COMEDIANS TAKE THE HELM. 

THINGS LIKE THIS REALLY MAKE ME QUESTION WHY I CONTINUE TO PAY THE THEIVING  LICENCE FEE. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 31/01/2017 at 21:22, mikeDnight said:

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MINDLESS ACADEMICS AND NOT VERY FUNNY IRISH COMEDIANS TAKE THE HELM. 

1 - I suspect that this decision was not entirely down to messrs. Cox and O'Briain

2 - I struggle with the phrase 'mindless academic'.  Surely this is an oxymoron?  You may or may not like his style of presentation, but Professor Brian Cox could hardly be described as mindless.

3 - What has the fact that Dara O'Briain is Irish got to do with anything?

Edited by michaelmorris
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, michaelmorris said:

1 - I suspect that decision was not entirely down to messrs. Cox and O'Briain

2 - I struggle with the phrase 'mindless academic'.  Surely this is an oxymoron?  You may or may not like his style of presentation, but Professor Brian Cox could hardly be described as mindless.

3 - What has the fact that Dara O'Briain is Irish got to do with anything?

I'm sure you're right on the first point Michael. Cox and O'Briain are merely figure heads following direction from people who pander to the lowest common denominator. By doing so they can put as little effort into producing a programme as possible. Sky at Night and Horizon are good examples of how far these once great programmes have fallen. Constant background music  (noise) coupled with meaningless locations and flashing lights, along with equally meaningless computer generated imagery, extend the programme length while depriving the viewer of any real substance. Too many presenters batting sentences to oneanother and back again, along with sickening displays of pretentious eccentricity, turns viewers away. Dedicating an entire programme to the southern hemisphere, is going to do little to encourage northern observers to get out under the night sky.

I love science and I love academia having studied at several universities. However, one thing always amazes me, and that is just how inflexible academics can be when alternative hypotheses are presented to them. In part this is because they are funded to research along a particular avenue, and anything that points out contrary evidence is usually not welcome. Mindless, because they become indoctrinated to think along a particular line and become incapable of lateral thinking. "Professor" is merely a title! Most of the advancements made in research are the result of hard graft by the many underlings, for which the Professor takes credit.

The reason I wrote "Irish comedian" was because I didn't intend to mention any names, which i thought would have been fairly obvious to most people. Astronomy is a fascinating subject, and especially fascinating is the work of amateur astronomers. Natural humour is welcome in any programme, but O'Briain acts like a class clown and brings the programme down. He's an unnecessary burden and not funny!

Mike 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, michaelmorris said:

1 - I suspect that this decision was not entirely down to messrs. Cox and O'Briain

 

Don't suppose they needed their arms twisted for an all expenses paid beano in Aus, I certainly wouldn't :grin:

Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Davey-T said:

Don't suppose they needed their arms twisted for an all expenses paid beano in Aus, I certainly wouldn't :grin:

Dave

Its the one annoying thing about the beeb science programs as I see it. In this case there are many advantages of going to AUS so i am not commenting specifically on that.

But Brian Cox's last series "Forces of Nature", I had to stop watching after 3 of 4 episodes. He (or the BBC) seem to not need any excuse to fly off to the other side of the planet to demonstrate things that could be just as easily demonstrated from the UK. They seem to have a huge budget that MUST be spent.

I would rather see more broadcasting of examples from here in the UK (it may get people out to visit these places), but most of all surely it would leave money left over to make MORE science programs.

But then I don't work for the public sector ...:eek:

Ho Hum !

Edited by alanjgreen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, alanjgreen said:

They seem to have a huge budget that MUST be spent.

I'm sure that all the points David Attenborough made in Life On Earth could have been made using British, or even Gloucestershire examples (the BBC Natural History Unit is based in Bristol) but I doubt that the series would have gone down as one of the greatest landmark documentary series in TV History?

Come to think of it, did Carl Sagan really need a mock up of a spaceship's bridge and computer graphics to get his point across?

We have to remember that the BBC's Reithian values are to inform, educate and entertain. They WILL reach a wider audience with 'big' productions and is that really a bad thing - assuming they remember to inform and educated as well. We should be relieved that the BBC considers topics such as natural history and astronomy as worthy of such budgets - otherwise we would end up with American-style documentaries built around a ten-second CGI sequence that is played a couple of dozen times to make sure they get every cent of value out of it.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would like to see published how much, including expenses, hotel bills etc., that these presenters are paid for each appearance. After all it is our money that pays for all of these programs. By law we have to fork out the licence fee, we have no choice if we want to watch any television program, be it from the BBC or any other broadcaster. Yhis is not to say I do not enjoy certain programs, even if they could be a lot better and more cheaply produced. We are a niche market and so I suppose we are a bit of an afterthought.

Derek

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davey-T said:

Stargazing Live and Springwatch get repeated on Yesterday ? I think.

You mean I can enjoy Major Tim all over again :) wonder what he will be doing this time... his teeth, cutting his toe nails :) perhaps going for a walk!

 

Money better spent on a robotic experiment of that I am sure :)

Edited by alanjgreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Physopto said:

Personally I would like to see published how much, including expenses, hotel bills etc., that these presenters are paid for each appearance. After all it is our money that pays for all of these programs. By law we have to fork out the licence fee, we have no choice if we want to watch any television program, be it from the BBC or any other broadcaster. Yhis is not to say I do not enjoy certain programs, even if they could be a lot better and more cheaply produced. We are a niche market and so I suppose we are a bit of an afterthought.

Derek

Not as simple as that when many TV programmes are produced by third party companies (ie the infamous British Bake Off), and all financial matters related to production lie with those parties - not with the BBC and by implication from the license fee.  Is SGL still co-produced with/by the OU?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose I'm biased. Having spent most of my working life working for charities, you can get rather fed up of the idea that you should be paid less either to make donations go further or because 'the work is a reward in itself'. Perhaps charity workers should be paid MORE than the average as their work contributes more to overall human well-being?

So I don't begrudge Brian Cox a Hilton over a Travelodge - I think his output does rather more to advance the BBC's mission than the presenters of Top Gear ever did.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

Mindless, because they become indoctrinated to think along a particular line and become incapable of lateral thinking. "Professor" is merely a title! Most of the advancements made in research are the result of hard graft by the many underlings, for which the Professor takes credit.

I agree with your assessment that a fair few (but not all) academics take more credit than is perhaps sometimes due for work done by others, especially for work by carried out by Ph.D post-graduate students.  (Been there, got the T Shirt).

I would suggest you listen to Brian Cox on a recent edition of the excellent 'Infinite Monkey Cage'.   A recent episode was all about getting it wrong in science (Science's Epic Fails).  Brian Cox has some very illuminating things to say about being flexible in one's thinking and being prepared to change one's ideas based on the evidence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00snr0w/episodes/downloads

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
52 minutes ago, DaveGarland said:

Ummm, shoot me if I'm being daft here. But Stargazing 'Live' from Australia? It'll be daylight won't it? Or do we have to watch it at breakfast time?

It will be dedicated to solar astronomy - fair enough as we never see the sun here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps rather than dedicating the presentation of the show, from within Australia, there ought simply to have been a co presenter in Australia and so focused on a topical theme of the Southern constellations, that way it would at least to an extent had loosely retained its 'grass root' connection to UK stargazing.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2017 at 17:50, DaveGarland said:

Ummm, shoot me if I'm being daft here. But Stargazing 'Live' from Australia? It'll be daylight won't it? Or do we have to watch it at breakfast time?

I was thinking exactly the same thing. :dontknow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • 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.