<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Nanny and the Professor</title>
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 06:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: JB of Brisbane</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76786</link>
		<dc:creator>JB of Brisbane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:01:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76786</guid>
		<description>A bit of cast information -

Nanny (Phoebe Figgerlily) - Juliet Mills (daughter of Sir John, sister of Hayley &#38; Donna)
Prof. Everett - Richard Long (remembered from The Big Valley)
The Kids - who knows, who cares? Although Kim Richards (Prudence) turned up in a couple of other shows.

And as for Battle Beyond The Stars - I liked that movie when I was about fifteen, before I found out it was just Seven Samurai (aka The Magnificent Seven) in space.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A bit of cast information -</p>
<p>Nanny (Phoebe Figgerlily) - Juliet Mills (daughter of Sir John, sister of Hayley &amp; Donna)<br />
Prof. Everett - Richard Long (remembered from The Big Valley)<br />
The Kids - who knows, who cares? Although Kim Richards (Prudence) turned up in a couple of other shows.</p>
<p>And as for Battle Beyond The Stars - I liked that movie when I was about fifteen, before I found out it was just Seven Samurai (aka The Magnificent Seven) in space.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Waalkes</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76785</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Waalkes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76785</guid>
		<description>Ah.  &lt;i&gt;Battle Beyond the Stars&lt;/i&gt;.  Yeah, I still have scars from that one, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah.  <i>Battle Beyond the Stars</i>.  Yeah, I still have scars from that one, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JediBear</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76784</link>
		<dc:creator>JediBear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:22:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76784</guid>
		<description>Phil, I noticed that your page to comets which you helpfully linked to doesn't actually mention much about what a comet would look like. It's more aimed at how they move.

In telescopic observations, a comet is basically a DFO - a dim, fuzzy object. Messier's catalogue of objects lists DFOs that Charles Messier had already identified that were not comets. A very useful tool for the comet-hunter.

A comet that looked fiery, had a visible tail, and was visibly moving would be very close to the sun, and almost certainly close enough for naked-eye observation.

Sadly, telescopes aren't quite THAT exciting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phil, I noticed that your page to comets which you helpfully linked to doesn&#8217;t actually mention much about what a comet would look like. It&#8217;s more aimed at how they move.</p>
<p>In telescopic observations, a comet is basically a DFO - a dim, fuzzy object. Messier&#8217;s catalogue of objects lists DFOs that Charles Messier had already identified that were not comets. A very useful tool for the comet-hunter.</p>
<p>A comet that looked fiery, had a visible tail, and was visibly moving would be very close to the sun, and almost certainly close enough for naked-eye observation.</p>
<p>Sadly, telescopes aren&#8217;t quite THAT exciting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lugosi</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76783</link>
		<dc:creator>Lugosi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 02:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76783</guid>
		<description>I must admit to being confused. Did Nanny create the comet through her magical powers? If so, does that make her more powerful than God? And  how can she be certain the comet she so recklessly created won't end up smacking into the Earth and wiping out humanity? And wouldn't the sudden introduction of another heavenly body into the solar system throw off the existing gravitational balances that govern the orbits of the various planets and assorter other components? Does the Professor end up putting the stones to her every night once the kids are asleep?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must admit to being confused. Did Nanny create the comet through her magical powers? If so, does that make her more powerful than God? And  how can she be certain the comet she so recklessly created won&#8217;t end up smacking into the Earth and wiping out humanity? And wouldn&#8217;t the sudden introduction of another heavenly body into the solar system throw off the existing gravitational balances that govern the orbits of the various planets and assorter other components? Does the Professor end up putting the stones to her every night once the kids are asleep?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76782</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Mar 2008 02:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76782</guid>
		<description>I identify Sam Jaffe with Lost Horizon the most. Not because I'm old (I'm not) but because I love movies more than tv.  Day the earth stood still is a distant second.

I can't even view that clip with a proxy.

)-:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I identify Sam Jaffe with Lost Horizon the most. Not because I&#8217;m old (I&#8217;m not) but because I love movies more than tv.  Day the earth stood still is a distant second.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t even view that clip with a proxy.</p>
<p>)-:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Macleod</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76781</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Macleod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:42:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76781</guid>
		<description>Can't watch the video here in BC, but just wanted to mention that Sam Jaffee played Gunga Din in the 1939 version. A classic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can&#8217;t watch the video here in BC, but just wanted to mention that Sam Jaffee played Gunga Din in the 1939 version. A classic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mus</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76741</link>
		<dc:creator>Mus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:52:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/13/the-nanny-and-the-professor/#comment-76741</guid>
		<description>I watched that episode, some family guy episodes, and a couple of the Simpsons episodes, and I have yet to see ANY ads. Whether it's thanks to noscript or adblock plus (both firefox extensions), I am not troubled by those pesky ads.

(ha ha ha, that sounded totally like an ad)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I watched that episode, some family guy episodes, and a couple of the Simpsons episodes, and I have yet to see ANY ads. Whether it&#8217;s thanks to noscript or adblock plus (both firefox extensions), I am not troubled by those pesky ads.</p>
<p>(ha ha ha, that sounded totally like an ad)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
