I thought the shot at Alton Brown was a rather cheap one. All he said on the show was that Eng was his chiropractor. Whatever woo woo stuff Eng may be involved in beyond that has nothing to do with Brown. It was a real guilt by association job.
This exemplifies why I can’t subscribe to any of the skeptical periodicals, be they in print or on the net. Skepticism has become so intertwined with blanket-coverage atheism that you can’t read one without having the other rudely shoved down your throat. I don’t mind hearing a opposing view point, but I do object to the smug sense of superiority and blatant mockery their arguments are invariably accompanied by. And this freek-show-style presentation is no different.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He's written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic and fights the abuse of science, but his true love is praising the wonders of real science.
The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking, movie reviews, and all that) can be found here.
Contact me: The Bad Astronomer "at" gmail "dot" com
"If things worked the way I wanted them to, any reporter about to do another 'sensational' story on deadly meteors would consult this volume, and bang! common sense would find its way into the news. How strange would that world be?" -- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating." -- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot Uprising
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:12 pm
I thought the shot at Alton Brown was a rather cheap one. All he said on the show was that Eng was his chiropractor. Whatever woo woo stuff Eng may be involved in beyond that has nothing to do with Brown. It was a real guilt by association job.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:32 am
This exemplifies why I can’t subscribe to any of the skeptical periodicals, be they in print or on the net. Skepticism has become so intertwined with blanket-coverage atheism that you can’t read one without having the other rudely shoved down your throat. I don’t mind hearing a opposing view point, but I do object to the smug sense of superiority and blatant mockery their arguments are invariably accompanied by. And this freek-show-style presentation is no different.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:42 am
WRT your review of the “1st on the moon”, have you seen the experiment that proves it’s not possible to land on the moon – via the skeptics’ circle – at http://humbugonline.blogspot.com/2006/07/spooked911-moon-landing-faked.html ?