Very cool: the folks at New Rule Productions put together a quick teaser trailer for The Skeptologists. I’ve uploaded it to Youtube:
It’s also on Facebook. The subject of the video is… well, if the show gets picked up, you’ll find out. 
Also, if you want to support the show (and given how many people responded to the call for a transcriptionist, I see that y’all do!), you can send an email to skeptologists@newrule.com. You’ll get an automated reply, but we’re collecting emails to show networks that there is a demand for quality shows for intelligent people who don’t buy into all the nonsense being aired right now. As Ryan Johnson, the director, wrote:
Raise your voice! Let it be known that it’s time for a TV series that focuses on the real, the intelligent and important advances in science, critical thinking and skepticism. The Skeptologists will be pitched to major networks soon, and we want to give the programming executives a sense of what kind of support they can received if they invest in a TV series of this kind.
We have started an email campaign to have fans of the show write-in in support of this show idea and let us know why you would watch a show about critical thinking, science and skepticism! We will compile the emails and present to the executives along with our all-star cast, entertaining pilot program and solid production background to seal a great TV deal to give the Skeptics of the world a show they can stand behind, and be proud of!
Take a moment, and send a brief email to skeptologists@newrule.com. You email will be collected and will help support the show.
Thank you very much,
-Ryan C. Johnson,
Director
Comments left here are useful too, so fire away.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Excellent, I hope I can see this on TV soon! I’ll definitely send them an email
April 9th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Let’s hope it is shown over here in the UK as well - can’t wait.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:09 am
I hope you guys get this on. I only allow myself to get five “season passes” on the TiVo at a time and it looks like I’m going to need something to replace Dogfights on The History Channel. And since, judging for the direction THC seems to be going these days, it will be replaced by some junk UFO Files like show, so I might have trouble finding something that’s not crap.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:14 am
I’ll need to see some proper footage of the show before I can make any comments.
Mind you, the phrase ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’ comes to mind.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Looks good so far! Definitely time for something better than all the craziness on the “educational” cable channels.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:24 am
I agree it’s too soon to offer suggestions, all I know so far is that you all pose really bad-ass. Which is a good start. I hope you get picked up, I will email my support.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Very cool!
Phil, you look too serious! All professional and ready to debunk crap theories
: )
I’m in Europe (Portugal) so there is no point in sending the mail, but I will be rooting for the success of the show!
Skeptologists are GO!
Ricardo
April 9th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Definitley can’t wait to see the whole thing. Huge fan of Phil, Steve, and Brian. Not as familiar with the rest, but I’m sure they’re awesome.
Also, DIGG IT!
http://digg.com/television/The_Skeptologists
April 9th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Wood block on bottle. Block falls off bottle. I confess that this means less than nothing to me. Somebody buy me a clue.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:45 am
I have no clue to what the wood block and glass bottle mean? Is this alluding to something? Is this something referring to parapsychology or the supernatural? Please explain it so the video makes sense.
I’m interested in the show, but please don’t play off the Indiana Jones theme with graphics too much. Especially since the upcoming Indiana Jones movie will be a let down from what I read and see in the trailers.
Also, don’t expect a warm reception from the wanna-be Fox Mulder’s and Art Bells out there in TV land. They’ll always pull out the chestnut “Well, you don’t know everything so it’s possible it exists!”
April 9th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Hey cool, I’m looking forward to this. Hope Discovery picks it up.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:50 am
I think the wood block suggests that the bottle contains a ghost, and the falling is supposed ‘proof’ of the supernatural that they will prove has been faked using the awesome power of SCIENCE!
Looks like an interesting show. I’ll try to catch it if it gets picked up. 2nding the suggestion to get some graphics that don’t look so much like Indiana Jones.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Hmmm… no comment, except that sandswipe is an astute person. Maybe even psychic.
Maybe.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Email sent. I debated on whether to use my work email (I, uh, work for a company that is owned by a major science-based network of television channels . . . it rhymes with “Biscovery”). After all, I don’t officially represent the network in any capacity. But I went ahead and sent it anyway, because it might lend some weight to my opinion. I just hope it doesn’t come back and bite me on the tuckus.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Living in a country where 2 of the 6 major tv networks and a lot of AM and FM radios are properties of evangelist churches too, and the other tv’s air countless non sense programs, even under the coverage of “seriousness” with a documentary approach, I sure envy you!
Mind you: our excellent (really!) ministry of environment stated recently that creationism should be taught in schools at the same level as science. It happens in other countries, like yours, but here in Brazil it seems that non sense and naivety are proliferating faster. It seems that there’s no space for intelligence in our tv networks (with very rare exceptions, of course).
My support e-mail to the new program is next thing to do.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:10 am
e Mail duly sent “Oh Captain my Captain”. REALLY hoping the show gets aired here in the UK. It looks to be just the sort of programme that the late great and sadly missed Carl Sagan advocated in Demon Haunted World. Good luck to you all.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:13 am
PS. The bottle and glass seemed a fairly obvious illustration of your basic woo-woo-telekinesis-poltergist-paranormal-hocus-pocus to me!
April 9th, 2008 at 10:15 am
PPS for glass read block….I think a gremlin got into my keyboard or my psychic channelling was a bit off : (
April 9th, 2008 at 10:18 am
I really hope you guys get picked up!
On a side note…did you know that one of the Google ads up top is for “Christian Astronomy”? What’s that?
April 9th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Looks cool, can’t wait!… oh, and nice pose, BA!
April 9th, 2008 at 10:18 am
By your command.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:26 am
I used to have a very old magic book–so old it was my dad’s when he was a teen–that told how to do this trick. Of course, it was on a somewhat smaller scale–penny and a coke botttle, not a wooden block.
It’s a little abstract, but I think it works. The wooden block falling “on its own” is definitely a cool image.
Greg E, I respectfully disagree with you on the Indy imagery. It conveys just the right image–a guy who is a scientist first, but also an adventurer.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:35 am
I’m sending an e-mail that’s for sure. I’m so sick of television shows that try to make me believe in the supernatural or just throw out general junk…
April 9th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Gnat:
I took a look on “Christian Astronomy”. Never mind… don’t bother to access the site yourself. It’s the usual idiocy of fanatics. Seems that burning Giordano Bruno as a heretic is seen as something good…
April 9th, 2008 at 10:44 am
I’m so excited about Skeptologists, I can’t think rationally!
…wait a second…
April 9th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Patricio:
Thanks for sacrificing yourself! I did try clicking on it, but my computer had fits…hmm, a sign?
April 9th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Let me the lone critical voice so far…
First, let me say that the show sounds interesting. But…
One thing I’ve seen among people who are not in the skeptical circle is that there is a strong perception that all skeptics are athiests. While this may or may not be true (it seems true by the message boards - but its a critical thinking mistake , I think, too make such assumptions), this perception could be a limiting factor for a show designed to teach critical thinking to the masses. If the show looks like its purpose is to attack religion it could have a problem with a lot of people you are trying to reach. And potentially sponsors. I’m not speaking about Fundamentalists who will react to certain cast members, but religious people of all faiths who believe in religion and are still skeptical in all other areas - there are lots of these people. With the best skeptical podcasts (in my opinion), I have to figure out what the hosts believe - and honestly I don’t care. But if I think they are attacking my religion (and by extension me), I’ll change the dial, er, use the remote and not watch.
The whole reason I bring this up is the teaser video. “Do you believe? We don’t” has a negative connotation beyond UFOs and Bigfoot. Maybe that’s what you were going for? I’m not sure, but it put me on guard more than hooked me.
I guess I’ll have to see the show if it gets picked up to know for sure.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Email sent, short and to the point. “We need this show. We need it now.”
Jc
April 9th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I’d love to see this as a show, but I really don’t think the name will help get those who could really benefit from it to try it out.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:57 am
You can guarantee that I’ll be watching. In fact, if this pilot doesn’t get the green light, I’ll have to disconnect my cable and ask for Comcast to stop my service. I’ll even go so far as to read a book! (Don’t test me, I’ll do it.)
April 9th, 2008 at 11:12 am
E-mail sent. I think this would be great on Discovery.
CXB: I hope it’s BA’s book you have in mind!
April 9th, 2008 at 11:19 am
I’ve sent my email.
Phil, as you know, we all admire you and your work. I must say that I think you can do better than blue-shirt-and-khakis as a signature outfit, though. There must be some fashion-adept readers here… what is the proper attire for woo smashing? Something those damned kids can really get excited about…
April 9th, 2008 at 11:24 am
My honest opinion? Okay . . .
The teaser didn’t leave me with a desire to see it. Let’s see . . . a block of wood on a bottle. The block of wood falls off. First thought: Cold air in bottle expands to room temperature, knocking off the block. If it was supposed to portray seemingly supernatural forces, then it failed miserably. In this context the slogan, “Do you believe? We don’t” amounts to hunting mice with an elephant gun. It came across as pretentious and arrogant, and that gave me the impression that the show would be much the same. Sort of like those spook shows that have teasers with people doing a lot of shrieking - and then you see a show with people doing a lot of shrieking. The fade to the stiff group shot of serious faces only reinforces that impression.
If you want more than a cult following, you’re going to have to appeal to a wider audience. People watch “Mythbusters” because it’s both smart and fun. The cast doesn’t take themselves seriously even when they’re examining serious topics. If “The Skeptologists” follows in the same vein, then I’m sorry, the trailer doesn’t convey that to the viewer.
At this point the teaser is a serious liability for a show with a title that already reeks of pretension. Again, using “Mythbusters” as an example, the title “Mythbusters” implies the focus is on busting myths - which is the premise of the show. The title “The Skeptologists” implies that the focus is on the skeptics in the show. And I’m sorry, but the stiff group shot doesn’t give the viewer the impression that anyone on the show will be interesting or entertaining.
My recommendation: Ditch the trailer, ditch the title, and come up with something descriptive that grabs the viewer’s interest. Think “Mythbusters.” Think “Dirty Jobs.” Think “Mysterious World” or “Mysterious Universe.” Think “Western Tech.” Have something more interesting than blocks falling off bottles. And if you must have a group shot, have a shot of you actually doing something.
As it stands now, it looks like a show I’d watch once to see what it was about, but it doesn’t look like a show I’d watch for more than fifteen minutes - if that long.
April 9th, 2008 at 11:27 am
dre,
I didn’t want to say anything, but since you brought it up…
Phil, you might want to try something a little less, um, “straight-laced”. Or at least don’t button your shirt all the way to the neck.
Just a humble observation!
April 9th, 2008 at 11:35 am
+1 to RL’s comment. I think you are going to have to frame your show’s goals carefully to avoid being seen as anti-religious, even if there are *aspects* of some religious practice that are worthy of a skeptical eye.
For example, I can see a show like “Prayer: does it really work?” not going over well for a TV show (upset religous groups, costing you a few corporate sponsors), even though that is something I’ve seen you address here on this website.
Sure, there will *always* be people upset with nearly *ANY* topic you take on, because there are always people that sell or support these products (magnetic bracelets, homeopathy, etc), but these religious topics seem especially risky.
April 9th, 2008 at 11:38 am
I once watched (most of) a show on so-called “flying rods” — see a news report on them at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amnNgXRK_vo, if you dare.
The entire show was based on building models to see if such creatures could fly (if they existed), rather than making any attempt as a different explanation. To my untrained eye, they looked just like mosquitos flying by the camera lens, smudged into a rod-like shape by motion blur.
I would hope that, if The Skeptologists were to tackle an issue like this, the experiments would be “could there be a simpler explanation?” and film/video “control mosquitos” and see what appears on film/video. Or, set up normal and high-speed cameras in places where these “flying rods” tend to appear, and see what the high-speed camera catches when the normal one shows a flying rod.
April 9th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Echoing KC and RL slightly…
I will probably give the show a try.
Any longevity will depend on how it’s presented…”know-it-all”-ness will turn a general audience off.
I do hope it works, but let’s say I’m skeptical.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I hope it does get picked up. I’d watch it religiously…I mean irreligiously…I mean…oh whatever…
I tired of seeing the same old “mystery” shows that just pander to irrationality. No one seems like they really want to get to the bottom of anything.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Ken B,
I saw that show too and in the last few minutes they actually replicated the rod effect by having bugs fly past a non-high-speed camera (and a high speed camera to prove they were really bugs). So despite the woo-filled beginning, the show actually debunked something pretty firmly. Rare for those shows isn’t it?
So far Skeptologists sounds like a good idea, but I second the worry about how the masses might recieve it. A bit of a makeover may be in order. but of course I’d need to see more of it to be completely sure.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
I like the trailer. But I think more should be added to it, more things that the skeptologists would cover. It would help give the audience a bigger picture about the show and what they would expect to see. ESP, Ghosts, Moon Hoax, etc.
Good stuff though. I think this idea has been a long time coming.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Greg E: “I have no clue to what the wood block and glass bottle mean?”
The wood block and the bottle form a secret Masonic symbol that is embedded in the street layout of Manhattan. You can only see it from orbit and through a purple filter, though. The top of the bottle lies exactly where the World Trade Center used to be, implying through mhidden Illuminati iconography that the apocalyptic genie has been released from the bottle, and the forces of the cloven hoofed man-goat are preparing for their final assault on all that is good and fluffy.
I hope this helps.
And if the show plans to do a “Does prayer work?” episode, I will help *pay* for the production costs, or do some editing for free on my Mac (if you loan me a copy of Final Cut).
KC: My recommendation: Ditch the trailer, ditch the title, and come up with something descriptive that grabs the viewer’s interest.
ReligionBusters!
Religion is the poison! We’re the antidote!
Episode 7: “Does Prayer Work?” and “Islamic Cosmology: Oh My God! It’s Full Of Djinns!”
Special guest star Christopher Hitchens lays the smackdown upon Rep. Monique Davis!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-change_atheist_bd06apr06,1,4016432.story
Tonight on Fox!
Ha ha ha ha! On Fox… can you imagine?
April 9th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Sadly, the word “skeptic” turns some people off. I am not one of those, personally. Maybe a well-written show will help ease the negative connotations. In case you decide to look at show other titles, here are a few suggestions:
Reality Squad
Truth Squad
Team Truth
Truth, Inc.
Stuff Explained
What’s Really Happening
That Makes Sense
Umm, No
April 9th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Thanks for posting this, Phil. I’ve enjoyed reading about shooting the pilot episode. Hopefully this will get picked up for production quickly.
I agree with some of the posters above–any examination of faith claims will be a very touchy matter. It doesn’t deserve to be, but it will.
However, that doesn’t diminish my enthusiasm for this show in the least. Best of luck with this!
April 9th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
i for one am tired of the woowoo shows on dicovery, travel, and history. like “ufo hunters” or “a haunting” or “ufo files” or “monsterquest”. these shows belong on the sci-fi channel. at least the discovery channel atempts to have some real science with mythbusters and smashlab. then there is the science channel that is dedicated to real world science. but this show cant be put ont the science channel, not enough poeple get it, my self incuded
April 9th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
If you worry about offending certain sensibilities, you’ll end up with a watered-down, PC version of what we need.
Tell the truth. Show how reality works. If people can’t stand reality, they can watch Fox.
The name/logo is pretty cheesy however! Consider it a ‘working title’, and go with something catchier.
Either way, we need it! Email on the way.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I’ve sent in my E-Mail, and hope this gets picked up. I can understand concerns over the use of the word skeptic, and the teaser was rather vague.
I’m imagining a future teaser/trailer. Same format, opens with a “Do you believe?” superimposed over a shot of the Loch Ness Monster. Cut to a scene of the cast standing on a boat, a toy submarine with Nessie’s head on it dangling from a fishing line, then display “We don’t” Display title, cast shot.
I think it communicates the message of debunking the paranormal much better, and is far less vague than a shot of a block falling off a bottle.
I do hope this gets picked up, and if the name ends up being changed, I think “Reasonauts” has a nice ring to it.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
BA looks so studly with his arms crossed, read to decimate urban myths.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
and the forces of the cloven hoofed man-goat are preparing for their final assault on all that is good and fluffy.
Sweet! Dionysus is making a return?! When/where’s the orgy and wine fest?
April 9th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
OK OK! I’ll write an email.
The rest of us can Reddit/Digg this story. Maybe we can get some publicity for this. I’m sure the BA wouldn’t object to a few hundred more emails being sent out.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
BA: Email written. You can pay me my five dollars through Paypal.
April 9th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Look! I’m being useful!
April 9th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
As a poor unemployed person struggling to make ends meet, I will eagerly buy whatever crap is advertised during broadcasts of The Skeptologists!
…however, will the advertisers understand the target audience? Maybe they’ll advertise Homeopathic remedies because it’s “scientific.” Do the Skeptologists have a plan to combat this?
I remember in Bad Astronomy (the book) that Phil mentioned an incident involving space.com. The advertisers thought it would be a really neat idea to put astrological star signs on the site…
Also, I strongly recommend that you pitch this show to the SBS network in Australia. They were the first free-to-air TV station in the world to air South Park, and they also air Mythbusters. None of my former blue-collar co-workers in Australia knew Phil Plait, James Randi or Michael Shermer, but they’ve all heard of the Mythbusters.
April 9th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
That bottle was one of them “Ghost in a bottle” items sold on Ebay, wasn’t it? See guys I told you there *was* a ghost in there.
/not really. And - email sent.
April 9th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
This show looks amazing. I have always loved Mythbusters and the like and this looks like the best so far. Speaking of, any word on when that Mythbusters you advised is going to air?
April 9th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I’m kind of curious which chemical reaction was taking place in the bottle. I’m guessing hydrogen was being produced?
April 9th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
I love that the critics have already crawled out from under their rocks to criticise what may or may not be on a show that hasn’t even been edited yet based on the title and a teaser trailer.
How about just saying something like jeeze I’m looking forward to this but I will reserve judgement until I’ve actually seen an episode. Give it a chance to air.
Same goes for the thin skinned whingers that are already threatening not to watch if their particular brand of superstition is treated sceptically. Hello! Nothing has aired yet and the topics to be covered are secret. I doubt something like the Skeptologists would alienate (maybe) potential viewers by tackling a topic like religion but even if they did get over it.
There is only one rule in television. Be entertaining and sell lots of advertising. Well, two rules. Be entertaining, sell lots of advertising and have hot babes… Um… Three rules…
April 9th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Email sent. Best of luck with this project. I hope it gets picked up. It sounds like a lot of fun.
April 9th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
[…] April 10, 2008 Your chance to make a difference - The Skeptologists Posted by andsaywedid under Film, Other Fun Stuff, Skepticism | Tags: Brian Dunning, Facebook, Kirsten Sanford, Mark Edward, Michael Shermer, Phil Plait, Steve Novella, television, The Skeptologists, Yau-Man Chu | All you skepticalogically minded folk who want to support what promises to be a fabulously skepticalogical tv show, please head over to The Bad Astronomer’s blog and read what he has to say about a pilot he has just completed filming for The Skeptologists. […]
April 9th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
To Shane…
The idea behind this topic and thread is to hear input and advice. It is not a coddle Phil thread or fawn over the tentative pilot trailer thread. We were asked to leave truthful thoughts in order to help in the end product.
Also, there’s only been one person on here so far that has said an utterly negative, mean-spirited, unconstructive thing about Phil and his potential show. All I did was state the truth about the American TV population.
Sorry to tell you, but most of the people who grew up watching TV know a show with flaws by simply seeing a commercial for it. And yes, 9 times out 10, you can judge a TV commercial’s book by it’s cover. This trailer needs work. Best of luck for its future, but this is a country whose culture is focused on entertainment, make-believe, and vicarious thrills and not deep-penetrating truths and logic.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I sent this. It’s cheesy, but it was fun to write. Hope it gets the point across.
Subject: We Need This
My name is Richard, and I speak for humanity when I say that we need skeptology and we need it from professionals. Honestly, I’m not looking for more reasons to sit on my a**, and television has never been a good enough one in the first place. But this is different. I want to see reality done real. I want to wake up in the morning and know that today I, and the other viewers of the world, are a little bit smarter and a little bit more perceptive and happy that we had so much fun getting there. The Skeptologists are all-stars. The world is their coliseum and the people need to be entertained.
How many wastes of airspace are touted as the next big bandwagon? How many two-bit sitcomadrama-trains wreck before they even get on the tracks? This is no two-bit train. The Skeptologists are interdimensional travelers. They ride a rocket ship armed with truth-seeking missiles. It needs no tracks and runs on pure, unadulterated reality. And there is no amount of ignorance or fanaticism that can hold down a rocket ship fueled by reality. The structure is sound, the fuel supply endless, and the passengers are ready to get on board. Welcome to our renaissance.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
The key word is entertainment. You put in a hard day of work, either physical or brain sweat or both. Which would you rather do: Watch TV for more of the same, or for escapism?
Let’s understand one thing: Not everyone likes “Mythbusters.” But so far those that don’t aren’t put off by the investigative aspect. For some it’s the explosions. For others, it’s the “dumb stunts.” In each case, they don’t enjoy what they see. They’re not entertained.
The spook, “UFO,” and cryptozoological shows all tap into the side-show entertainment value. While I like side-shows as good as the next persion, I tend not to bother with them because their “investigations” aren’t very investigative and thus I’m not entertained. I usually don’t bother with these shows. Or the perpetual Nostradamus programs, either, and for the same reasons.
If you want people to watch, entertain them. Entertain them, and you can make a show about aliens in tutus making crop circles and people will watch it.
Which is not to say “The Skeptologists” can’t be entertaining. But the teaser gives no indication of the fun - if any - in store.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
The trailer needed more toast. Crunchy toast, with melted butter on top. Also, a slice from a good slab of Vermont Cheddar would have been appreciated.
Television needs more programs that cater for the needs of today’s toast eating public. I hope that the Skeptologists will devote at least 70% of each show to toast-related issues. Also, no more than 10% of the show should involve crouton-only stories.
April 9th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Uniforms. Get some. Jumpsuits. Or matching fedoras.
April 9th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
…sneer loudly and then proclaim in a mocking voice:
‘Where is your God now?’
April 9th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
If this gets scheduled to air, I will buy a DVR. I will even subscribe to cable if need be. Please, program directors, air this and restore my faith (no pun intended) in humankind!
April 10th, 2008 at 3:57 am
I’d like to see this show will be picked up by a network, but i don’t have much hope.
But since i’m not from the US, my opinion doesn’t count anyway, not for those people that make decisions.
April 10th, 2008 at 5:16 am
“Patricio Cruzat” wrote of the “quality” of the shows aired here in Brazil . Nevertheless there is a lot of good stuff assuming you can afford cable or satellite tv , and that’s where I think this show is aimed at . So the sooner we start sending emails the better the chances we’ll get it here , even if with a years delay or so !
April 10th, 2008 at 11:03 am
E-mail sent. I second the comments about the trailer needing a little something more. I loved Maltodextrin’s Nessie suggestion!
Is the show name set? I kinda liked Law Mom’s “Truth Squad.”
April 10th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I don’t know if this will help or not, but I really don’t watch broadcast TV anymore. If Skeptologists releases seasons on DVD, I will definitely order them.
Here’s why I don’t watch TV anymore: the programming is dreadful and the ads so ubiquitous as to be abusive. If it’s not “unreality” TV, it’s the solid mass of shows and commercials pandering exclusively to superstition and what appears to be a systematic vandalism of humanity’s body of knowledge.
If there was a channel I felt truly rose above the garbage that passes for programming, I’d cite them and praise them openly. But there aren’t, so I can’t.
Mythbusters, Penn and Teller’s Bull(cough), Bill Nye, Dr Who, the late Firefly, and Skeptologists are a very rare breed of show: ones I will go out of my way to watch. Four occasional shows aren’t enough for me to cough up $X per month and put up with a diminishing 1:2 ratio of commercials to content (and that doesn’t count the constant popup ads that interfere with what little content there is), and no summer content whatsoever. I’d much rather wait for the DVDs and do the “programming” to meet my own needs.
But if the networks and cable stations add more good shows, smart shows, honest shows, (and dare I hope, end abusive ad practices), it may again become worthwhile to resubscribe. Skeptologists, if picked up, is going to be a big step in the right direction. I’m looking forward to seeing it.
April 10th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I love that the critics have already crawled out from under their rocks to criticise what may or may not be on a show that hasn’t even been edited yet based on the title and a teaser trailer.
Tough kibble, Shane. This is a skeptical site and comments were invited. The BA did *not* say, “Please post a bunch of sycophantic yes-posts.” Since he’s a skeptic, I would hope he’d appreciate some constructive criticism. If not, well, tough kibble for all, I guess.
Some of us would like to see some hard core skepticism in the media, and would hate to see a good chance wasted on things like the Bermuda Triangle, Loch Ness and goddanged bloody pissant spoon bending.
But I suppose it has to start somewhere, so I support the show regardless of my initial impressions. Maybe they can lay a groundwork with the easy stuff and build on that.
If it succeeds, maybe I can successfully pitch my show.
I’d be covering the vaccination issue right out of the gate. And a good portion of the show would debunk recent news stories, especially the “‘Sleep causes cancer’ says new scientific study!” type of crap.
I’d even tackle abortion. I’d have the Freakanomics guys on about how they correlated abortion with lower crime (and nothing to do with Gulianai’s “broken window” approach). Then we could look and see if the cause is there.
Actually, it might be a good thing to pitch to Fox. Underneath it all, I think they relish controversy over ideological purity.
April 10th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Christian X Burnhamon: ‘Where is your God now?’
He’s over there at the bar ordering us all a round of drinks.
Now *that’s* a god I could hang with.
April 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
[…] er nu dette her for noget? Der findes en teaser trailer på Bad Astronomy Blog. Iblandt gruppen til sidst i klippet er der da nogen mennesker man kender: […]
April 10th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
To delurk here - I think the block-on-the-bottle image is too obscure. I grew up with a parent immersed in New Age/occult stuff, and I’ve never heard of this test; the general public, I think, will be confused instead of enticed to watch the show. You need an image more readily identified with pseudoscience/”psychic” phenomena. (This will also take care of the potentially troublesome connotations of the “do you believe?” tagline; it’ll be clear that you’re talking about pseudoscience and not religion.)
All else looks fine. Good luck!
April 11th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Here is a sample email I’ve been sending out to all of my contacts. I hope I can generate hundreds - nay THOUSANDS - of emails.
——
I’ve been following the development of this TV show on several podcasts and blogs that I listen to and read religiously. The cast is great (Dr. Michael Shermer, Dr. Phil Plait, Dr. Kirsten Sanford, and other tasty morsels), the idea spot-on (skeptics taking on popular pseudo-scientific nonsense and other crap), and something that I really want to see on TV right now (besides boobies). They need people to email a show of support for the show so that whey they pitch it to networks they can show a core audience exists for this type of programming. I already sent an email telling them that I fill a nice demographic - married, male, college educated, income above $100k, large genitalia - stuff that advertisers really want to see. Anyway - take a few minutes and read the item below and send an email of support….unless you don’t want to….which makes you a total suckbucket.
April 11th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Christian X. Burnham writes:
Josef Mengele had a Jewish kid as a servant. While the kid watched his mother and father marching into the gas chamber, Mengele used those same words: “Where is your God now?”
April 11th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
I liked the trailer - got the supernatural bent of it right off. It actually made me wonder exactly which explanation they were going to debunk for the block falling off; psychic power, ghosts, or some gods will. Have to agree with those above about the Indiana Jones look, though. And not because the next movie is supposedly crap, but because Indiana keeps looking for and finding significant mythological religious artifacts instead of real lost treasures (imagine if he found a cache of scrolls saved from the library at Alexandria - just before it was torched - that held the key to the Nazi’s making THE BOMB in time to change the outcome of WWII. Could have been a great movie, taught a lot of history, and still made half a gazillion dollars). /off soapbox
Don’t try and appeal to the masses - that’s what’s wrong with most shows to begin with. Aim for your target audience and don’t miss! Those that can be offended if a subject near and dear to their hearts is addressed by a skeptical mind in a public manor will be offended no matter what you do, so just consider those folks as outside of your target audience and get on with it. Tell the truth as best as you can see it, and let the chips of unreason fall where they may. It might not be a huge success to do this, but no matter what the outcome at least you’ll be able to look yourself in the eye in the mirror every morning.
And BTW, geeks having fun showing off their brains is entertaining as all get out (IMHO) and I wish there were a whole channel that showed nothing but such shows. Show us just how smart people can actually be, and how much fun it is to really be using that big brain to do what the brain does best - learn. Entertainment with a purpose, I guess is what I’m trying to say.
Anywho, good luck and email sent off as requested.
April 11th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
To my thinking, to expect skeptics to support something based purely on ideological claims rather than cold, hard,…acts, is very bad form. Show us a trailer at the very least.
While I very much admire, Dr. Novella, Michael Shermer and Phil Plait, and am wild about Kirsten Sanford, I for one wouldn’t put letter behind my name on behalf of something I have no idea is good or bad, even though it is done with the help of noted skeptics and lays claim to being “a TV series that focuses on the real, the intelligent and important advances in science, critical thinking and skepticism”.
April 12th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
I have to echo some of the comments about the block on bottle thing-I totally didn’t get it when I first saw it, and I read a lot about skepticism and etc. I guess that’s one cultural myth I’ve missed. I also agree that they loch ness monster picture would be waaaay more well-known and recognized-I think people would see that and get the point of the show right away.
April 12th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Barton-
Do you really want to compare Christian Burnham to Mengele?
That’s disgusting. I’m not thrilled with his comment either, but what you said is beyond the pale. Feel free to go away and not comment here anymore.
April 13th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
BA and others:
My comment was a throwaway surreal image. Sorry if it overstepped the mark.
April 14th, 2008 at 8:07 am
[…] over to Phil Plait’s blog for a teaser trailer of the pilot, and take note of the letter there from the director: Raise your voice! Let it be […]