It must be true, I saw it on TV!

[planetling]

For example, Michio Kaku (Sci Fi Science: Physics of the Impossible), who I admire and watch everything that he's in:

discusses how meteors can positively impact Mars, how to create an oxygen rich atmosphere, how nuclear bombs can heat the planet, etc. so that eventually we can terraform Mars for human colonization.

But he leaves out important facts, such as Mars only has 3 layers (versus Earths 5) and that its center does not flow to provide magnetic poles, which is necessary for cosmic shielding. Or that because Mars is much smaller than Earth, there is not enough gravity to hold on to a substantive atmosphere.

Space related programming is tremendously better than when I was growing up and I feel that it could motivate the next generation to get so much more involved with space. But is leaving out important facts the right way to educate people? I know that he's just trying to stimulate the minds of people with wonder and excitement, and who knows, maybe somebody will find a way to add enough mass and to liquify and spin the center! But leaving out important details such as this, in my opinion, only lowers the quality of educational programming.

I guess there's only so much air time available for such shows :|

 

[MeteorWayne]

Yep, Mr Kaku, the Science, Discovery, and NatGeo channels are responsible for spread more crap alleged "science" than anything else on TV today, except the completely ignorant science "news" on the networks both broadcast and cable

 

[crazyeddie]

For example, Michio Kaku (Sci Fi Science: Physics of the Impossible), who I admire and watch everything that he's in:

discusses how meteors can positively impact Mars, how to create an oxygen rich atmosphere, how nuclear bombs can heat the planet, etc. so that eventually we can terraform Mars for human colonization.

But he leaves out important facts, such as Mars only has 3 layers (versus Earths 5) and that its center does not flow to provide magnetic poles, which is necessary for cosmic shielding. Or that because Mars is much smaller than Earth, there is not enough gravity to hold on to a substantive atmosphere.

Perhaps he left such information out because they are not essential factors when one is discussing the possibility of terraforming Mars.

A thick atmosphere will provide sufficient shielding from cosmic rays and solar radiation, so a planetary magnetic field is not a requirement. Yes, an artificially-created atmosphere will gradually be eroded by photodisassociation and the small planet's low escape velocity, but it is assumed that once we go to all the trouble and expense of creating a thick atmosphere, we will also maintain it by replenishing whatever is lost to space.

Nevertheless, your point is well-taken. There is a lot of borderline-crap science on the Discovery, Science, and National Geographic channels, and it seems like it's always the same people who get interviewed. Alexei Filippenko is another one you see everywhere. He's usually pretty careful to stick to real, not "fringe" science, but others, especially Michio Kaku, often leaves viewers with the impression that with science, anything end everything is possible.

 

[planetling]

Brian Cox is another exception and who I enjoy watching the most. Not only is he sincerely passionate, he discusses things as it applies today and provides simply outstanding examples. I tend to follow up with more research after watching his program than any of the others combined.

 

[adrenalynn]

Sign me up as another fan of Professor Cox. These networks are "edutainment". The "edu" may come first, but there's more weight in the "tainment" side of that equation.

At least professor Cox has the intellectual honesty to generally note when he's running off on emotion and wild-arse speculation. His passion and emotion are what so frequently trigger emotional responses in me. And given that I tend not to run with the unwashed masses, that leads me to fits of the creative that I otherwise might not have arrived at.

In fact, it was his trip above the thin blue line that inspired me to start thinking about how I get there myself, and led to my fledgling balloon program as early forays to there.

His pedigree, if you haven't researched him, is _staggering_. Royal Society Research Fellow in particle physics, particle physics chair at University of Manchester, and works on ATLAS at CERN. Dude's as real as a heart attack.

I first heard him speak at TED a couple years ago. And, as with his shows on the science channels - he never tells me anything I don't intellectually already know, but his delivery always blows my mind wide open. His obvious passion and curiosity spawn similar reactions in me.

 

[EarthlingX]

Wiki : Brian Cox

Official Webpage : http://www.apolloschildren.com/

http://twitter.com/ProfBrianCox

I dare you to try searching for him on YouTube.

 

[adrenalynn]

I hadn't ever searched him on YouTube, I must admit.

His take on "faked moon landings" was _awesome_! Just makes him that much more of a cuddly geek, imho. :geek:

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Brian Cox rocks! His new show about the Solar System is good.

Michio Kaku is like an annoying mosquito. :lol:

'Hyperspace' was a good book, though.