I was told about this video by a woman whose husband filmed it. I believe it was made in the Cavorite mine, near Bedford, by some old wells. But I can’t be sure.
Astonishing! I’m short on time tonight as I write this, but I’ll have more about this next week.
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking, movie reviews, and all that) can be found here.
 | ||
 | Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009. |
 |
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.
Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us
December 1st, 2005 at 11:42 pm
That is so cool! I’m gonna make my own “weird gravitational anomaly” video now…
Nice use of edits, misdirection, and a wooden support beam!
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:21 am
Wow, I can’t decide if he’s trying to be funny, or if he wants us to believe this. Surely this is too ridiculous for the latter.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:11 am
what exactly is that thing supposed to be?
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:57 am
Uh.. “cavorite” that rings a bell. You’re a very bad astronomer tonight.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:01 am
Oh- I just checked it out on Wikipedia. Cavorite is indeed genuine (look it up if you don’t believe me). They began mining it in the 18th century, but it was assumed that supplies had run out in the early 20th century due to overmining. Apparently, there’s only a very very limited supply of this stuff around today, and check this out! the only remaining working mine is located in Iraq!
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:35 am
Actually, the Norwegian fun boys Eia, Tufte Johansen, Antonsen and Schau made a nationally famous cook sketch about this a couple of years ago. In their cooking show, all ingredients (flour, eggs, sugar etc.) and even tools, had the habit of falling to the side, 90 degrees off the gravitational force direction. Viewers thought: Are they using a large fan? magnets? Until we realised: NO, they have turned camera, table, chairs, people, everything 90 degrees. Excellent effect. I wish I could show you the video, but I can’t find it on the web.
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:36 am
Is that real? I did not see the person’s hand behaving in the same manner – there was no trace of effort on the part of the person to hold his hand steady (keep it from falling up – it looks just as steady as it would in “normal” gravity) at the spot from where the stones fell towards the ceiling…I think the part where just the hand is shown has actually been shot with the camera upside down and the hand is held such that the palm opens thumb-down – in effect when the tape is played back normally it appears as though the stones are falling up.
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:11 am
Is this video available anywhere else in a windows media format ? Can’t install quicktime at work so can’t watch it.
No probs if its not i’ll catch it at home this evening.
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:28 am
Of course this video is real! Just because it could have been faked- that doesn’t mean that it was faked. Again, if you look at the Wikipedia entry for Cavorite, you’ll see that (in its crystalline state) it contains excess zero point energy, with respect to the background vacuum field. (This excess accreted over a period of several thousand years) Unfortunately, there’s not enough of this stuff left to truly compete with oil reserves, and most of the natural supply is locked up in clathrate hydrates.
Anyway, cavorite only appears to be defying the first law of thermodynamics. If you leave it long enough, it will slowly sink back down to the ground. The zero-point energy is leeched into the background vacuum field. If you could sum the total energy from both the vaccuum and cavorite contributions you would see that energy is always strictly conserved.
I expect the BA is going to explain the recent discovery that Iapetus (a moon of Saturn) contains sizable quantities of cavorite. This caused much excitement amongst NASA engineers, who are hoping to leverage the properties of this unique mineral to power a sustainable robotic probe.
I’ve got a PhD in physics, so trust me on this ok.
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:00 am
there’s an awful lot of cut-aways in that movie.
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:14 am
If you wanted to make something convincing (and not look like a high school film project on special effects) you shouldn’t use the cutaways associated with doctoring. I agree with RoboSpy, it’s too rediculous to be taken seriously.
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:36 am
Cutaways are perhaps because it was shown on TV…
I am skeptical… Look at the shot where he drops the dirt. The closeup. What’s that wire you see there? It’s not on the previous shot. I have troubles deciding if it’s there or if it’s a shadow from the camera’s spotlight. Because there seems to be a spotlight directed by the camera. It’s hard to check if the patterns in the stone are repeated in the previous shot too. Because of the video’s quality.
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:38 am
This is obviously a fake. If the cut-aways don’t clue you, common sense must. Things do not fall up, “Cavorite” or not. Modern digital video allows you to do a lot of neat things and blur the line between reality and make believe.
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:41 am
I just went to Wikipedia and looked it up. Never mind….very bad astronomer….
December 2nd, 2005 at 6:43 am
“In 1901, H. G. Wells wrote the book “The First Men In The Moon”. The hero gets to the Moon with the aid of a special stuff called “cavorite”, named after a certain Mr. Cavor. Cavorite had the unique property of being able to block any gravitational field. So if you made a sheet of cavorite, and laid it down on the ground, all the atmosphere directly above it would be shielded from the Earth’s gravity, and would promptly zip off into space. The heroes make a spacecraft out of this cavorite stuff, and then proceed to go to the Moon and have their adventures.
Of course, it’s all pure fantasy.”
http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/gmis9739.htm
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:25 am
Things can fall up.
Read Sirens of Titan by Vonnegut.
(T.U.R.N..T..H.ER..O.C..K..E..T.U..P..S.I.D….ED..OW.N)
Uh, anyway, I’m so happy I got someone to read Wikipedia. I’m just sorry that so many others have trampled over the good name of Mr Cavor. I suppose you all think the Moon landings were faked too.
Do you really think that the BA, Mr. Cavor, the two guys in the video and the woman whose husband filmed it are in a “conspiracy” to dupe the public? Can you please use some skeptical thinking next time!
I suppose you’re next going to suggest that the woman’s husband was the BA himself? I’m sorry, but I’m tired of responding to all the conspiracy nuts on this page. If you can’t learn critical thinking from the BA page then I don’t see any hope for you.
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:39 am
A comment on the questionable veracity of the oft vaunted wikipedia is here;
A responsible skeptic would do well to bear it in mind…
Link edited by The Bad Astronomer
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:46 am
If you’re worried about the veracity of wikipedia, try looking up “Heavy Sarcasm” on it.
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:48 am
Huh… its April 1st again so soon!?
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:50 am
This video reminds me of those “famous” Hutchison tapes of the “Hutchison Effect” that that pretty cool show that used to be on FX, “Exploring the Unknown”
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:11 am
Ok folks that was a fascinating video of a phenomenon rarely seen.
On another note. I have recently acquired the Eiffel Tower in Paris. The plan was to use it as a summer residence but I found the view from the top platform a bit bland for my taste. So now I have decided to cut it up and sell it as scrap metal. You know how much value metal has these days because of all the recycling going on, so here is a chance to make a good deal. If anyone want in on this deal please feel free to contact me.
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:14 am
I apologize. I’m Irish. I was brought up in sarcasm. Having a hard time living in Texas now. Still, I did get a good laugh out of all of this.
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:46 am
Talk of cavorite reminds me of the very early Buck Rogers comic strips, in the late ’20s & early ’30s. In the 25th Century there is an exotic material called “inertron”, which has a negative gravitational mass; it accelerates upwards. So people strap on backpacks (called “jumping belts”) filled with inertron, which allows them to jump up to great heights, or to jump from great heights safely.
But Buck Rogers found himself in the 25th Century due to an accident in a mine. He was doing a safety inspection of an abandoned mine, when it caved in and trapped him. Fortunately for him, there was a rare mixture of natural gases trapped in with him that preserved him in a state of sleep ’til he was revived hundreds of years later. BUT- maybe the mine in today’s video- IS INERTRON? And that very mine is the one where Buck Rogers has been trapped since 1929?
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:47 am
No kidding – it was a gravity mine that caused the loss of the Kobayashi Maru with all hands…
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:21 am
KHAN…. KHAAAAAAAN!
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:26 am
Man, after watching this video, my whole world just got turned upside down.
gurgle…
Mike Petersen
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:41 am
They goofed. To make it more authentic, they needed to dub in sounds of pebbles hitting a wooden floor. The sound is definitely that of pebbles hitting other pebbles on the floor. Very similar to the sound made when he picked up the handful of pebbles.
Hmm, maybe I’ll use it in class.
-Cindy
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:48 am
Nebogipfel Said:
>No kidding – it was a gravity mine that caused the loss of the Kobayashi Maru with all hands…
Where do you think they get the artificial gravity for their space ships? Gravity mines, of course.
December 2nd, 2005 at 10:18 am
If if turn off the volume it becomes a Sonic Mine?
December 2nd, 2005 at 10:48 am
The sad thing is, many people will be fooled by this because they want to believe in the supernatural.
December 2nd, 2005 at 11:15 am
Ok, at least it could have been a good fake, come on that was awful
1.) Explain why the pebbles hit the ceiling and not them
2.) Get rid of the cheezy edit to the hand
3.) At least edit out the dust dropping to the floor when he picks up the handful of pebbles.
Ugh Bad Astronomer, Bad Bad Bad, someone get me a newspaper so I can bop him on the nose..
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:40 pm
Aubri Says: “If you’re worried about the veracity of wikipedia, trying looking up “Heavy Sarcasm” on it.”
A jest taken as a fact by people who don’t know any better makes more work for those of us who care about the truth. Your source of “Heavy Sarcasm” is, in fact, going to cause us all big problems down the road.
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:58 pm
Viggen, what is your point? What’s the jest? Are you going to get all serious about a blog entry in the “time-sink” category? Not only is everyone having a lot of fun with this- but we’re strangely enough learning some interesting things here. I’m fascinated by the reactions I’ve seen on this page. Almost everyone instantly got the great joke (not me.. I had to think for a bit), but we’ve seen a wide variety of reactions.
Your criticisms of Wikipedia seem a little heavy handed perhaps on this page. I’d love to discuss it though- I’m passionate about Wikipedia! I’ve spent the last few hours battling creationists on various Wikipedia pages- and I have to source my criticisms and defend them and make sure that the final page is fair to both the skeptics and those with heart-felt creationist feelings. I’d love to hear the BA’s opinion (or anyone else’s) on the astronomy on Wikipedia.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:29 pm
I was a maroon…he says with a sheepish grin and a scuff of the toe…
note to self, “critical thinking…critical thinking…must remember…”
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:34 pm
Confession from the filmmaker:
When my friend John & I shot this as an obvious (to us) joke, it never occurred to me that so many people would take it seriously. I probably got close to 100 emails from people asking what I thought the phenomenon might be: Magnetism? An updraft? Maybe only 20% knew it was fake, and of those, most couldn’t figure out how it was done. I’d say I’ve heard from a total of no more than 5 people who guessed the simplistic trick of turning the camera upside down. The light source is mounted on the camera, so even the shadows are correct.
Thanks for all the great comments!!
PS – We filmed this at the Gunsight Mine, near Tecopa, CA. I hadn’t heard of Cavorite until reading this thread; I assumed the Gunsight was a silver mine like many others in the region.
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:34 pm
Faked? Curses, I was all set to ask to subscribe to your newsletter.
-Andy B
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:36 pm
you would have gotten away with it if it weren’t for those meddling kids!
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:07 pm
Carvorite (and Professor Carvor) make an appearance in graphic novel The League Of Extraordinary Gentleman. It led to some scenes that would have been absolutely smashing on film if Hollywood wasn’t a place where good ideas go to die.
Instead we got a giant submarine in the canals of Venice.
Tom Sawyer? WTF?
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:54 pm
You people are a whole lot smarter than the university physics department where I work. None of the professors and only one student (after 5 views) could work out the trick.
On the other hand, maybe it’s got nothing to do with smarts- maybe we’ve just got black hearts.
December 2nd, 2005 at 5:24 pm
Pretty amazing video…he almost said the F word -
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:07 pm
BS!! please tell me you´re joking when you think this video is not FAKE!.
how can anyone be so dumb..
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:50 pm
Jóhann Says:
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:07 pm
BS!! please tell me you´re joking when you think this video is not FAKE!.
how can anyone be so dumb..
Uh.. yeah, this is such an important issue too. Cool down. This is fun, not an IQ test.
December 3rd, 2005 at 9:51 am
BA’s probably just biding his time watching our comments and laughing, until he decides to post a debunking page on it.
In addition to many other comments about inaccuracies (the person’s hand isn’t going up, whole people aren’t going up), also the pebbles on the ground aren’t going up on their own. If there really were a gravitational anomaly it would be only affecting things above a certain height, and the person was really inobservant to not notice his hand also being pulled upwards.
As for a material that can block gravitational fields, I expect that a sheet of material wouldn’t do it, but you’d need a 3-dimensional surface, like how a Faraday cage blocks electromagnetic fields.
December 3rd, 2005 at 11:21 am
Exactly what I was thinking Zandperl.
I believe this is BA’s way of showing us how hoaxes can get out of hand, and spread as if they were reality.
As you can see from some of the responses, we have many so called “experts”, all trying to explain it in terms of Zero Point Energy, gravitational anomalies, etc. Nice try guys, but the fact of the matter is, it’s nearly impossible for a natural phenomenon such as this to occur. If I should be proven wrong, then perhaps I’ve been jaded by too much skepticism. However, it’s better to consider this a hoax, until absolutely proven otherwise.
As for obtaining sources from the Wikipedia, it’s not as though they were written by scientists involved in the particular field of study. It cannot be used as a definitive reference source for proof of anything. Ask any of the millions of Wikipedia junkies such as myself, and we’ve come across countless mistakes.
December 3rd, 2005 at 11:35 am
The way BA set it up made me think they were trying to put one over on us at first. I just wish they had done more with it. Maybe walk back and find an old couple stuck on the ceiling or something. Or cut to a year later and they’re making money off it.
December 3rd, 2005 at 1:40 pm
this has got to be some psych student’s dissertation. People who are at a website devoted to debunking believe it? Other people argue with them about it? And some can’t imagine they turned the camera upside down? ok, take your left hand and grab your right ear, take your right hand and grab your left ear, now yank you head out of your butt.
When I was in the 6th grade my family went to south dakota and we went to some tourist place that was apparently outside the realm of normal physics. It was really cool, water flowed uphill, you leaned one way or another walking through a room while the room seemed straight. very cool. totally illusion, but cool nonetheless.
December 3rd, 2005 at 2:14 pm
“I believe it was made in the Cavorite mine, near Bedford, by some old wells. But I can’t be sure.”
“Cavorite” and “old wells,” huh? I think the BA is just having some fun with an obscure H.G. Wells reference.
December 3rd, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Uh, for those who still don’t get my little joke….
My Wikipedia description for cavorite was entirely made up. If you search cavorite on Wikipedia then you’ll see it lists it as a fictional chemical substance and provides links to “The First Men in the Moon”. The doggerel I made up about zero-point energy was all just joking.
I did say look it up! A few did.
Remember people, skeptical thinking.
December 3rd, 2005 at 6:21 pm
zandperl, very astute. I did say I’ll have more next week…
December 3rd, 2005 at 7:35 pm
I’m surprised that nobody has yet mentioned A Deepness in the Sky by Vernor Vinge. One of the more interesting parts of the novel was that it described what a cavorite mine, if such a thing existed, would look like. In particular, you wouldn’t find rocks flying up — you’d need to have the material dispersed in such a way that reverse-gravity effects would be precluded until refining happened.
Somebody hasn’t been keeping up with their alternate-reality fiction lately.
December 3rd, 2005 at 11:53 pm
Actually I thought the acting on the video was pretty darn good. That’s the only reason it would fool anyone, the cutaway to the hand closeup was pretty obvious. If you were trying to demonstrate something that fell up and could be seen on the ceiling, and you started with a shot that included the whole view, there would be no reason to cutaway to a closeup unless you were either a hoaxster or studying to be the next Steven Spielberg.
December 4th, 2005 at 2:08 am
I agree with Ken. G. The video was done extremely well. Even if the cutaway was a bit of a give-away, I doubt most people notice in the first viewing. So many special effects are done with cutaways that are generally subliminal. I remember as a kid going through an A-Team crash scene 3 or 4 times on a VHS before I became aware of the cutaway.
For the smug people here who think this was amateurish- let’s see if any of them can come up with a better video.
Finally, it should be noted that there are many examples of genuine videos and photographs that have been criticized on the internet as being obvious fakes. For instance, I follow some of the Apple rumor sites. Sometimes you’ll see a photo of a product before its official release. Even in the cases that such photos are genuine you’ll see many posters say that it was a bad photoshop job that anyone could do- and they’ll even point out obvious mistakes.
Let’s imagine this video had been a little bit more convincing (i.e. one continuous shot- lot’s of money spent on special effects etc.) How would we then have reacted? Could we imagine any plausible explanations that would explain the apparent gravity defying gravel? Maybe they were pre-magnetized or maybe the video was shot underwater somehow?
There are lots of magic tricks where I have no idea how the trick is performed- I could watch them a billion times and gosh-darn it- it would still look like the lady was being sawed in half. (There wouldn’t even be any video trickery in this case!) So it’s obviously not enough to be able to spot trickery. Skepticism is generally much tougher than that.
Finally, I’ll admit that the mention of cavorite was the instant tip-off for me. I wonder how quickly I would have worked this out otherwise. Is there any shame in not getting the trick? I don’t think so. I think it’s perfectly reasonable for someone to watch that video and claim that they don’t know how it’s done and that it could even be real- but – they would like more information. If the effect could be clearly documented and repeated a thousand times, then it would become much much more convincing. There are many one-off events that are almost impossible to explain using the scientific method. Some times we’re just not smart enough- or we need more information.
Well, I’ve posted too much to this discussion- but it just grabbed me somehow. It’s such an interesting topic.
December 4th, 2005 at 2:48 am
Christian,
I thought it was well made as well, but I have to say that the cutaway stood out like a dogs B…. on a canary.
I actually thought they would show him doing it again without the cutaway, because he was wearing a helmet that would prevent his hair from dangling in an obvious fashion if he was strapped upside down.
December 4th, 2005 at 3:04 am
Well Thomas, we’re all going to look pretty foolish tomorrow when the BA announces the video was in fact genuine and he’s discovered anti-gravity!
December 4th, 2005 at 3:38 am
Ha, theres only like 30 cutaways its definately not a trick! They never show him dropping the rocks, just his hand. Not to mention the sound the rocks make.
December 4th, 2005 at 3:53 am
BA, you might want to turn off the google ads. Today I found a link to a site selling an anti grav device, http://www.cypardon.co.uk/
December 4th, 2005 at 4:36 am
What are you talking about Zac? That page is hilarious. Everyone should immediately go to: http://www.cypardon.co.uk
I doubt anyone who reads this page is going to be buying an anti-gravity machine any time soon.
December 4th, 2005 at 11:21 am
Christian,
If BA announces anti-gravity as a fact tomorrow…. well…
EIFFEL TOWER SHARES FOR SALE, GET’EM HERE LAST CHANCE! HURRY THEY ARE GOING FAST!
December 4th, 2005 at 12:30 pm
Hmm… I’m guessing the stuff on the ground stays there and isn’t flying upwards because it’s beyond the pull of the ceiling’s gravity.
Or something.
December 4th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
Greetings,
I’d like to inform you of the Frappr! map for freethinker blogs:
http://www.frappr.com/freethinkers
If you have a blog please considering adding your push-pin and blog URL.
In addition, if you know of any other blogging freethinkers I’d appreciate
it if you forward this invitation to them.
I participate in a similar map and we have close to 200 international
members. In short: it’s a great way to visually promote blogs within our
nontheistic community.
Thus far no members outside of America. Who’s gonna be the first from the international community?
Finally, feel free to grab the image I created for your own blog. Or, for
that matter, make your own!
Sincerely,
Bob Patterson
Got Blog? Add it to Freethinkers!
http://www.frappr.com/freethinkers
Blogroll me!
http://www.taozenchi.com/bcpblog/
December 4th, 2005 at 4:46 pm
The Cypardon antigravity site has got to be a joke. I’ll bet the author gets a kick out of reading the emails.
Note that there are no photos of the product or any demonstrations anywhere, and the main use mentioned on the home page is for solving traffic problems! Also, this made me laugh out loud: “There are about 500 sightings every year of U.F.O.s…Many are triangular.” Next to this quote is a picture of the Concorde!
(In the case of the video, Brian Dunning even gave it away on the “pictures” page. He says, “And, just for fun, view this video of a ‘gravitational anomaly’ we found inside the mine…”)
December 4th, 2005 at 6:07 pm
I would use Wikipedia more as a authoritative source for Doctor Who, Spiderman, and Lost than for an authoritative source for scientific fact.
What screamed fake about the video was the cuts. It should have been one continuous shot. In addition, one big giveaway was the audio. Despite the video cuts, the audio continued uninterrupted.
Nice hoax.
December 4th, 2005 at 6:11 pm
As a quick guide, take a modem jet plane and remove the following……
Wings and engines
Large fuel tanks.
Under-carriage
Tail unit
Galley
Then add 4 x CYPARDON gyro units, one small a.c. power unit and batteries
Lmfao XD
December 5th, 2005 at 8:36 am
Christian Burnham said, “Viggen what is your point? What’s the jest? Are you going to get all serious about a blog entry in the “time-sinkâ€? catagory? Your criticisms of Wikipedia seem a little heavy handed perhaps on this page…”
Originally, all I did was post some information and make a simple statement. I feel strongly that Wikipedia is dangerous because it mixes good information with questionable information in a venue that is easily accessible by people who don’t know any better. It is all well and good to become elitist and say, “well of course you should know it’s a joke,” except that somebody is always going to take it otherwise. If you don’t know any better, how do you sort joke entries from real ones?
Being a skeptic is all well and good, but it does take some experience and education in order to become an effective skeptic -and this is something that many readers on the internet will always lack. Wikipedia is a nifty idea and a unique venue for debate, but I think there’s some caution required that has not yet been put in place… especially in light of the very real problems involving information clarity that exist in the world today.
If you think I’m being unnecessarily overbearing, or heavy handed, that is your perrogative. I apologize with that; I have no intention of insulting anyone, but my serious opinion is no less valid than everyone else’s. Maybe this whole thread is all about joking and the odd man out is the one who sees something serious and dangerous. Well, I do see a darker topic lying under this and I’m not a bit afraid of expressing that view point. To say “Not only is everyone having fun with this…” implies that it is wrong to have a different opinion because I apparently am not “everyone” and I should conform to the group opinion. Applying peer pressure is an easy way to dissencourage both creative thought and critical thought.
I thought the original video was pretty funny, and I understood what had been done immediately. What got me interested in the darker topic here was that someone would immediately turn around and dig up information that seemed to corroborate the video in its fakey stance (regardless of whether that person intends only to contribute to a joke). What the darker topic is is that a third person perspective will immediately take the two together and carry them somewhere, maybe blindly. The link I posted exemplifies this. Misinformation propagates quickly indeed in our world today, perhaps even from an “innocent” joke.
I hope I’ve made it clear why I feel as I do, and I would be happy to clarify if not.
December 5th, 2005 at 1:39 pm
Hehe, fooled me. I tend to believe everything on BA.com. Silly me
I guess i’ve learned to be more skeptic of everything i read on the web, even here. I guess that’s what he is trying to say, or make a point of by posting this. Dont believe everything you see, or read even on BA.com.
December 5th, 2005 at 10:38 pm
BA, I can do your video one better:
LINK
Link edited by The Bad Astronomer
December 5th, 2005 at 10:38 pm
Oh, shoot. My url seems to have messed up the page. Sorry, all…
December 6th, 2005 at 7:04 am
Just because something is in Wikipedia, it has to be true???
December 7th, 2005 at 3:26 pm
Nigel, that seems to be a common misconception. Actually, it’s not quite that black and white, but reasonably close.
The real question is the reliability and accuracy of source material. Two reasons to look something up: 1) to learn something, 2) to support your position on something. Suppose I state that airplanes fly by force of the pilot’s will. I then want to prove my point, so I cite “Howthingswork�, “Wikipedia�, and for grins, Snopes. Those three have articles that state something to the effect agreeing with my statement. Thus I have justification for my belief that planes fly by the pilot’s wish. Suddenly along comes some know-it-all who cites “The Aerodynamic Principles of Fixed Wing Aircraft� (McMillan and Chase, 1986)*, which describes fluid dynamics, the principles of lift and drag, Bernoulli vs. Newton, etc ad nauseum. Now who is correct? Me with my 3 references, or him with his 1? Part of the answer, of course, is the quality of the references – his is 1st principles technical text book, mine are three online webpages with dubious authorship. Of course, even that isn’t a guarantee the text book is right, but still, it is more likely to be correct.
Wikipedia operates on the principle that because it can be edited by anyone, the technically informed people are able to read, evaluate, and edit the content to make it more correct. And if bad stuff gets in, someone can correct it. It can also be discussed and debated for those points that get more gray. That’s the theory. However, it assumes that because the technical people can participate that they do participate. Also, it assumes that the more correct information is more convincing, and able to sway the majority of participants on that topic. If the content is controversial and not balanced, it can incite a repetition of each side editing and reverting posts. You would think factual matters wouldn’t be subject to that kind of attack….
People seem to find their favorite online (i.e. quick and easy) resources. They validate with one or two entries, the content seems clear, then they use those references for everything. Except just because Wikipedia correctly discusses airplane flight does not mean it is correct in discussing submarines. Maybe, maybe not.
The bottom line is you can’t accept any source as automatically correct. Wikipedia is a nice reference, but isn’t necessarily accurate, and must be scrutinized on a case-by-case basis.
December 7th, 2005 at 9:01 pm
Who says it is anti-gravity ?
Has no-one considered any alternatives ?
What if the rocks and sand were of a lower density than the surrounding atmosphere ? Would not the rocks “float” ?
Ian
December 7th, 2005 at 9:06 pm
Of course the real question is why the ytivarg (Wizard of Id comic strip) is only effective from hand height.
Otherwise the rocks and sand would fall upwards from the floor without human intervention.
And yes, I know it is faked.
Ian
January 8th, 2006 at 8:26 am
TIME SINK. TIME SINK! I DIDN’T ORDER NO STINKING TIME SINK!!!
March 11th, 2006 at 7:37 pm
Here is a better link to the video; I moved it to youtube.com because the bandwidth was getting to be a bit too much:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSS5hRdHkgQ