Stargazing Live Australia

[bejay1957]

OK tonight, except linking genuine scientific study for ET life with misidentifications of mundane objects...

[laudropb]

Well that's it over for another year can't say I will miss it. Tonight's episode was typical of this series. Very uneven content. Some good and some just plain boring.

[saac]

I thought it was all really good, the final episode in particular I thought had a really interesting spread of topics.  The closing section at the end was brilliant, wholly honest and unprepared, it showed that the cast had thoroughly enjoyed themselves -  hopefully getting across the enthusiasm and fun to be had in the subject of astronomy/cosmology.   More of the same please BBC.

 

Jim 

[Gina]

I was out tonight watching a play at a local village hall which was superb and highly enjoyable so I missed SGL - probably watch it off the net if my dreadful internet connection will allow it.

[michaelmorris]

I cannot believe they had an unchallenged UFO piece on Stargazing Live.  Ruined the whole programme. Come on BBC, what the (word removed) are you up to?

[JOC]

9 hours ago, saac said:

it showed that the cast had thoroughly enjoyed themselves

I missed last night's episode, but if it had the same format as day 2 I don't think I would have missed much.  It wasn't what I expected of something titled 'stargazing live'.  I thought they would have much more of live shots through their big telescope - maybe live feed from a big star party showing some pictures of what other amateur astronomers were seeing, much more....well.....actual astronomy!  Re: the comment I quoted above - yes, I bet the cast had thoroughly enjoyed themselves, well wouldn't you?  An all expenses paid trip to Australia on a busman's holiday courtesy of BBC licence payers who got 3 hours of TV from it and very little of that was 'live'.  I am not sure that I count that as value for money, though I do applaud any effort to get science onto TV and at least this is a more minority science, but I do wonder if the same budget could have produced a better programme and perhaps more of it with a little bit of extra planning and a less ambitious location.

[Droogie 2001]

I enjoyed last nights episode. It started to feel a bit more familiar when they were discussing black holes etc.
Overall it was weaker than previous series and like someone else mentioned the after show part 'Back to Earth' was sorely missed. i.e. No Space Cocktails!

Still credit to the BBC for trying something different.

[LightBucket]

Totally disappointed, not once did they actually look through a telescope on set at the skies above, apart from showing pictures taken earlier in the night, not once did they actually discuss how you can see the objects they were pointing at in the night sky, not that it would have been much use to use here in the U.K, not once did they mention any equipment used to view objects, over 60% of the links and stories were about land based science and not space, and what the ...... has growing coral got to do with astronomy, other than the fact it used the moonlight to reproduce, they were absolutely scraping the barrel for ideas, it's not at all what the show is about and not at all whatnit started off about all those years ago....

And to top it all Brian cox is the worst presenter I have ever seen, he constantly talk over Dara and Chris  his jokes, if you can call them that are terrible, and he acts like an excited little kid when he gets some new scientific evidence about something......sack him, and let Dara and Chris host the show, or better still Dara and Liz....

I actually did enjoy the Gandalf looking person Geoff, I thought he was very knowledgeable, and explained things in easy to understand terms, and didn't go off subject.....

C'mon BBC we pay hard earned money for these programmes, get it back to where it was in the first two series please...... rant over

[Peter Drew]

Visitors to the Stargazing Live version at the Astronomy Centre were treated to illustrated talks on Astro imaging, solar observation, planetary science and general amateur astronomy each evening. Visitors on the Thursday evening also got a look at the Moon through a 16" SCT.       

[Stu]

16 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

Visitors to the Stargazing Live version at the Astronomy Centre were treated to illustrated talks on Astro imaging, solar observation, planetary science and general amateur astronomy each evening. Visitors on the Thursday evening also got a look at the Moon through a 16" SCT.       

That sounds far more what it should be about Peter. I didn't watch, and don't intend to from what I've heard, they have completely missed the point!  

[scarp15]

The Liz Bonnin and Geoff features, contrasting the Northern and Southern hemispheres were fairly engaging and some of the science features were also interesting, other features were in my opinion a bit topical 'Blue Peter'. It felt detached somehow, presenting the entire show with all the presenters based over there, as though a mere BBC jolly. Overall I think that it was quite mediocre, I would like to see highlighted for example, a feature and discussion on the increasing concerns and (if there are any) possible solutions for addressing light pollution blighting the UK.   

[callisto]

BBC.......I would have flown economy class, stayed in their version of Travelodge and give the viewers something worth while to watch!

Offers there for next year 

[cotterless45]

Think next time they should head back to the reality of observing with light pollution and our weather. Making the most of these with the trips to dark sites , is what it's all about for most of us.Wonderful sights are possible and we know how  

Some of the programmes were enjoyable, but at no time did I feel enthusiasm that would get someone into astronomy. Oh well back to permacloud !

old Nick.

[101nut]

I was shocked when I walked in and my mum (gawd bless her) - who is now 70 and, to be honest, couldn't tell Orion's belt from a toilet roll - was watching SGL and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Says something about the target audience ...

I admit to liking parts of it. The myths and legends are interesting and I thought the hairy bloke could be very good to listen to. The 'search for Planet 9' results were a bit of a misnomer - without knowing the albedo of the planet there's no way of telling whether it's observable or not so Clint Flintoff's summary comments about it 'not being here or here or here ...' were certainly 'optimistic' interpretations of the data without looking for star occultations too.

Given previous experience, I would question why they spent money travelling to Australia at all. They *never* spend much time looking at the sky even if it is clear, so it probably wasn't for the sky. I'd like to know the thinking behind the spending of my licence fee ...

AndyG

[Tomjo59]

Bit of a mixed bag this year. Not a bad idea going to Oz, to give people an idea about the southern sky (and to avoid the British weather - pity about cyclone Debbie though!)

I didn't mind too much them including a bit about UFOs, as lots of people seem to be interested, but it should have been rigorously critical, and it wasn't.

Maybe it's a personal thing, but I can't help finding Liz Bonnin irritating. It is very clear she hasn't any real understanding of the material she is presenting to camera.

[Alien 13]

I realy enjoyed it all and didn't want it to end, it has certainly got me thinking about a Newt and a cylinder of CO2 to play with, might try it with my fracs and lenses looks like a good way of cleaning.

I am sure the show will encourage lots of visitors to the southern hemisphere, I know I want to go and see the upside down moon and the Galactic core.

The only thing missing was the follow on chat show that I always enjoy.

Alan

[Owmuchonomy]

Clint Liftoff - precious! ?

[Starlight 1]

23 minutes ago, 101nut said:

hairy bloke could be very good to listen to

Think he was very good and its not the last we see of him ., he do love his night sky.

[mikeDnight]

I didn't watch any of it! 

Old re-runs of Sky at Night, before the useless academics and clowns took over, and the BBC may get my attention! Real amateurs talking real amateur astronomy is whats sorely needed, but the BBC dimwhits cant see it!

Mike 

[Jonk]

1 hour ago, Tomjo59 said:

Maybe it's a personal thing, but I can't help finding Liz Bonnin irritating. It is very clear she hasn't any real understanding of the material she is presenting to camera.

She's a biologist by trade isn't she?

[Anne S]

45 minutes ago, Jonk said:

She's a biologist by trade isn't she?

As can be seen by the fact the following programme on Thursday she was at the Galápagos Islands!

I just think that the programme makers generally  think we've all got the concentration of a 3 year old and we've got to reminded every 10 minutes of what's happening and they can't spend too long on any subject because we'll get bored and wander off!

[ronin]

Only Chris is a specific astronomer, BC is a partical physicist (close) - hence his interest in Cern, Liz is a biochemist then Biologist, Maggie is if I recall a mechanical engineer. Not sure how to describe Dara.

The first Star Gazing Live's were good, covered the areas that people here tend to do. Seemed to go astray at the Eclipse one when it moved to March. Still couldn't see why they tried to occupy 3 nights for an event that lasted 2 minutes and as normal was clouded out. The next I think was 3 nights of Tim Peake on the ISS. Just didn't get that one - he wasn't the first and the ISS is still there and still has people on it. Why 3 nights ?

Was disappointed in the sky views at this years, they were poor - what cameras did they use ? The one Dara bought at the airport I guess.

Topics seemed not astronomical but things that had some "distant" component of astronomy in them. The coral is "old hat" and Ch 4 or Yesterday actually had the Attenborough one on about 3 days previously.

Saw about 1/4 of the first, missed the second and saw about 1/4 of the third. From what I did see I suspect I could have missed all of them and not actually missed anything. Shame as the southern skies have a lot to offer.

"Gandalf" seemed good, suspect could have been more interesting and fun if he had done it all. They did  seem to have all the bits required to have made a good series of programs - skies, people, observatories and more. Just did not come together.

[Alien 13]

I get the feeling I watched a completely different program from many others, to me the format is perfect and enjoyable, thank god we have moved away from the old school programs like the early Sky at Night which was worse than watching paint dry.

Alan

[Owmuchonomy]

I'm taking Alan down under with me rather than the rest of you miserable so and sos. 

[bejay1957]

While I didn't see tonight's Gardener's World, from Twitter there are all manner of comments/complaints that it featured a lengthy section on gardening in Barbados, which was deemed pointless as it didn't relate to gardening in the UK - get the feeling that the Beeb/makers/producers can't win across various interests/hobbies...