Comments on: I won a Quarkie! http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/ 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. Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:07:16 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: khms http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194175 khms Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:45:40 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194175 I read the tuna piece and much of the debate, until I gave up in disgust. I might have been interested in a debate about how to improve tuna fishing - what works, what doesn't, and why - but I cannot find it in me to be interested in a debate for debate's sake, which is exactly what artificially restricting the debate to the choice between two equally unacceptable options is. This is not really about science at all. (Disclaimer: I don't eat tuna, and in fact nothing that lived in the water with the exception of rice - I hate the taste, and at least to me all that water life does have a common taste (or more probably smell).) As to the iron bands thing, I didn't manage more than the first paragraph or two; I really dislike talk about stuff like man being reunited with the past - sounds more like religion to me than like science. But as I haven't read the rest, I can't really say anything more about it than that this, too, won't make it into my feeds list. As for Phil, well, while the Hubble thing certainly wasn't <i>bad</i>, I'd probably have chosen something else had it been up to me - I don't think it's exactly his best. But then, that's just me. And I think it's already clear that my ideas about what's good differ from those that decided on the ranking. After all this, you won't be surprised to hear that I really didn't manage to scare up any interest in looking at the 3Q site ... I read the tuna piece and much of the debate, until I gave up in disgust. I might have been interested in a debate about how to improve tuna fishing – what works, what doesn’t, and why – but I cannot find it in me to be interested in a debate for debate’s sake, which is exactly what artificially restricting the debate to the choice between two equally unacceptable options is. This is not really about science at all.

(Disclaimer: I don’t eat tuna, and in fact nothing that lived in the water with the exception of rice – I hate the taste, and at least to me all that water life does have a common taste (or more probably smell).)

As to the iron bands thing, I didn’t manage more than the first paragraph or two; I really dislike talk about stuff like man being reunited with the past – sounds more like religion to me than like science. But as I haven’t read the rest, I can’t really say anything more about it than that this, too, won’t make it into my feeds list.

As for Phil, well, while the Hubble thing certainly wasn’t bad, I’d probably have chosen something else had it been up to me – I don’t think it’s exactly his best. But then, that’s just me. And I think it’s already clear that my ideas about what’s good differ from those that decided on the ranking.

After all this, you won’t be surprised to hear that I really didn’t manage to scare up any interest in looking at the 3Q site …

]]> By: Katie H http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194163 Katie H Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:19:35 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194163 I submitted the hubble post! I wasn't sure if it had been accepted as it didn't appear on the comments though. Congrats! I submitted the hubble post! I wasn’t sure if it had been accepted as it didn’t appear on the comments though.
Congrats!

]]> By: Doug Watts http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194120 Doug Watts Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:16:41 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194120 Both types of tuna fishing need to be banned. This stuff is like hunting deer with a 15 megaton nuke. This is why the oceans are dying. Both types of tuna fishing need to be banned. This stuff is like hunting deer with a 15 megaton nuke. This is why the oceans are dying.

]]> By: Stone Age Scientist http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194075 Stone Age Scientist Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:22:56 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194075 As per CJA's entry, the table becomes: <blockquote></blockquote> Marine life caught per 10 million small tunas caught <TABLE BORDER=1 RULES=ALL FRAME=BOX> <TR> <TD>Marine Life Caught</TD> <TH>Floating Object</TH> <TH>Dolphin Associated</TH> </TR> <TR> <TH>Dolphins</TH> <TD>2</TD> <TD>570,000</TD> <TR> <TH>Mahi Mahis</TH> <TD>39,528</TD> <TD>14,000</TD> <TR> <TH>Billfish</TH> <TD>496</TD> <TD>74,286</TD> <TR> <TH>Sea Turtles</TH> <TD>78</TD> <TD>14,286</TD> <TR> <TH>Sharks</TH> <TD>10,737</TD> <TD>0 ~ 57</TD> <TR> <TH>Wahoos</TH> <TD>9,128</TD> <TD>0 ~ 57</TD> <TR> <TH>Rainbow Runners</TH> <TD>2,312</TD> <TD>57</TD> <TR> <TH>Yellowtails</TH> <TD>229</TD> <TD>57</TD> <TR> <TH>Triggerfish</TH> <TD>4</TD> <TD>0 ~ 57</TD> <TR> <TH>Other small fish</TH> <TD>975</TD> <TD>429</TD> <TR> <TH>Other large fish</TH> <TD>15</TD> <TD>4,286</TD> </TABLE> CJA @ #13, are you sure it's 570K dolphins? Please confirm. As per CJA’s entry, the table becomes:

Marine life caught per 10 million small tunas caught

Marine Life Caught Floating Object Dolphin Associated
Dolphins 2 570,000
Mahi Mahis 39,528 14,000
Billfish 496 74,286
Sea Turtles 78 14,286
Sharks 10,737 0 ~ 57
Wahoos 9,128 0 ~ 57
Rainbow Runners 2,312 57
Yellowtails 229 57
Triggerfish 4 0 ~ 57
Other small fish 975 429
Other large fish 15 4,286

CJA @ #13, are you sure it’s 570K dolphins? Please confirm.

]]> By: Stone Age Scientist http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194069 Stone Age Scientist Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:49:24 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194069 My eyes, they hurt!! I hope the table below soothes them. <blockquote></blockquote> Marine life caught per ten thousand sets of purse seine nets <TABLE BORDER=1 RULES=ALL FRAME=BOX> <TR> <TD> Marine Life Caught </TD> <TH> Floating Object </TH> <TH> Dolphin Associated </TH> </TR> <TR> <TH> Dolphins</TH> <TD> 25</TD> <TD> 4,000</TD> <TR> <TH> Small Tunas</TH> <TD> 130,000,000</TD> <TD> 70,000</TD> <TR> <TH> Mahi Mahis</TH> <TD> 513,870</TD> <TD> 100</TD> <TR> <TH> Billfish</TH> <TD> 6,540</TD> <TD> 520</TD> <TR> <TH> Sea Turtles</TH> <TD> 1,020</TD> <TD> 100</TD> <TR> <TH> Sharks</TH> <TD> 139,580</TD> <TD> ~</TD> <TR> <TH> Wahoos</TH> <TD> 118,660</TD> <TD> ~</TD> <TR> <TH> Rainbow Runners</TH> <TD> 30,050</TD> <TD> ~</TD> <TR> <TH> Yellowtails</TH> <TD> 2,980</TD> <TD> ~</TD> <TR> <TH> Triggerfish</TH> <TD> 50</TD> <TD> ~</TD> <TR> <TH> Other small fish</TH> <TD> 12,680</TD> <TD> 3</TD> <TR> <TH> Other large fish</TH> <TD> 200</TD> <TD> 30</TD> </TABLE> *Not really sure what the difference between "purse seine nets around immature tuna" and "purse seine nets around mature yellowfin" is. Maybe <b><i>WhySharksMatter</i></b> could clarify. Hope the table helps. My eyes, they hurt!! I hope the table below soothes them.

Marine life caught per ten thousand sets of purse seine nets

Marine Life Caught Floating Object Dolphin Associated
Dolphins 25 4,000
Small Tunas 130,000,000 70,000
Mahi Mahis 513,870 100
Billfish 6,540 520
Sea Turtles 1,020 100
Sharks 139,580 ~
Wahoos 118,660 ~
Rainbow Runners 30,050 ~
Yellowtails 2,980 ~
Triggerfish 50 ~
Other small fish 12,680 3
Other large fish 200 30

*Not really sure what the difference between “purse seine nets around immature tuna” and “purse seine nets around mature yellowfin” is. Maybe WhySharksMatter could clarify.

Hope the table helps.

]]> By: Stone Age Scientist http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194059 Stone Age Scientist Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:13:20 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194059 Yay, Phil won the Charm, <strike>Quirk</strike>, I mean, Quark, Award. :D Yay, Phil won the Charm, Quirk, I mean, Quark, Award. :D

]]> By: John - Moon Atlas 2009 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/comment-page-1/#comment-194046 John - Moon Atlas 2009 Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:19:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/22/i-won-a-quarkie/#comment-194046 Nice one Phil...well deserved...and congratulations! Just a query...but is publication of donations always necessary? I know it kinda highlights the need for donations for particular charities, projects that need support (and that's great), but annoucement of donations made, and by whom, has never been a favoured practice for this observer. I would have preferred them just saying that "a contribution was made", or that "the charity/project is open for contributions". If one gives something for free, helps someone for the sake of helping, then it should just be that -- no recognition, and no payback is always necessary. The givee and acceptee both benefit! Congrats again :-) John Nice one Phil…well deserved…and congratulations!

Just a query…but is publication of donations always necessary? I know it kinda highlights the need for donations for particular charities, projects that need support (and that’s great), but annoucement of donations made, and by whom, has never been a favoured practice for this observer. I would have preferred them just saying that “a contribution was made”, or that “the charity/project is open for contributions”.

If one gives something for free, helps someone for the sake of helping, then it should just be that — no recognition, and no payback is always necessary. The givee and acceptee both benefit!

Congrats again :-)
John

]]>