Comments on: Mainstream Skepticism Win! Score one for New Media http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/ The official blog of the Skeptologists Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:38:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Trausti http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-18015 Trausti Sun, 14 Feb 2010 18:41:26 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-18015 Yeah, I was gonna comment on that garbage as well. “Stuff They Don’t Want You to Know” podcast is pure pseudo-science and howstuffworks is on my shit list. Yeah, I was gonna comment on that garbage as well. “Stuff They Don’t Want You to Know” podcast is pure pseudo-science and howstuffworks is on my shit list.

]]> By: Dave Jones http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17598 Dave Jones Fri, 05 Feb 2010 05:15:57 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17598 Maybe I'll pick up a couple of their podcasts again... I was put off by an episode of the main (I think) "how stuff works" podcast when they gave the moon landing 'hoax' WAY too much slack. I'd love to support them, being mostly fellow Atlanteans, but it's such a grab bag. But I'll try the Tech cast, and my wife likes the History cast. And she is never wrong. ;) Maybe I’ll pick up a couple of their podcasts again… I was put off by an episode of the main (I think) “how stuff works” podcast when they gave the moon landing ‘hoax’ WAY too much slack. I’d love to support them, being mostly fellow Atlanteans, but it’s such a grab bag. But I’ll try the Tech cast, and my wife likes the History cast. And she is never wrong. ;)

]]> By: TJ http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17591 TJ Fri, 05 Feb 2010 01:53:06 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17591 My mistake, I say howstuffworks.com and I read How it's made. I freaking hate that show. Sorry. ;) My mistake, I say howstuffworks.com and I read How it’s made. I freaking hate that show.

Sorry.

;)

]]> By: Michael Bok http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17556 Michael Bok Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:35:55 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17556 Ryan, I completely agree and I wasn't criticizing Jonathan Strickland; I love his podcast as well as "Stuff you should know" and "Stuff you missed in history class." I was just pointing out that I was disappointed to see such a nonsensical podcast as STDWYTK offered alongside high quality, fact-based offerings like "Tech Stuff" and the others. Ryan,

I completely agree and I wasn’t criticizing Jonathan Strickland; I love his podcast as well as “Stuff you should know” and “Stuff you missed in history class.” I was just pointing out that I was disappointed to see such a nonsensical podcast as STDWYTK offered alongside high quality, fact-based offerings like “Tech Stuff” and the others.

]]> By: Ryan Johnson http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17555 Ryan Johnson Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:12:26 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17555 How is that relevant to this? How is that relevant to this?

]]> By: Ryan Johnson http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17554 Ryan Johnson Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:11:48 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17554 Abrams and Bok, Rather than pointing out what's wrong with a program that Strickland has no control of, let's focus our energy to supporting the projects that DO get it right. We'll ALWAYS find more crap to deal with. The purpose of my post was to highlight and support those that ARE making a concerted effort. Abrams and Bok,

Rather than pointing out what’s wrong with a program that Strickland has no control of, let’s focus our energy to supporting the projects that DO get it right.

We’ll ALWAYS find more crap to deal with. The purpose of my post was to highlight and support those that ARE making a concerted effort.

]]> By: Ryan Johnson http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17553 Ryan Johnson Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:09:05 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17553 I meant to check that! then forgot, Thanks, I corrected it. I meant to check that! then forgot, Thanks, I corrected it.

]]> By: Pat in Montreal http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17546 Pat in Montreal Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:36:03 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17546 I have to disagree there TJ... I think the "how stuff works" folks generally manage to bring science and technology to the masses. Personally I think Discovery networks went to hell in a hand-basket when they started to produce all those ridiculous paranormal, ghost and cryptozoology shows... the motorcycle, fishing and logging shows were merely annoying but I'll admit there was still something to be learned. But all the paranormal stuff, thats just over the top. Time to rename Discovery networks to the Woowoo Network :) I have to disagree there TJ… I think the “how stuff works” folks generally manage to bring science and technology to the masses.

Personally I think Discovery networks went to hell in a hand-basket when they started to produce all those ridiculous paranormal, ghost and cryptozoology shows… the motorcycle, fishing and logging shows were merely annoying but I’ll admit there was still something to be learned. But all the paranormal stuff, thats just over the top.

Time to rename Discovery networks to the Woowoo Network :)

]]> By: TJ http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17540 TJ Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:06:14 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17540 I'm sorry, but it's my opinion that 'how stuff works' is ruining the discovery network. Fricken science channel seems to have had a marathon of those for a few weeks. More science, less gadget bs. I’m sorry, but it’s my opinion that ‘how stuff works’ is ruining the discovery network. Fricken science channel seems to have had a marathon of those for a few weeks. More science, less gadget bs.

]]> By: Hubert http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/02/02/techstuffwin/#comment-17537 Hubert Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:17:39 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=6363#comment-17537 It's Penn Jillette. Btw, I wish he was so popular as the pseudoscientific 5-blade razor. It’s Penn Jillette. Btw, I wish he was so popular as the pseudoscientific 5-blade razor.

]]>