Podcasts about to mars

This week, Desmond and Tom review a newish (2016) film from a favorite director: Takashi Miike. The film in question is the wild sci-fi manga adaptation Terra Formars. Then Des goes solo on a Dread Media Top 5 Takashi Miike Films. And we pay tribute to one of the great American artists: David Lynch. Songs included: "In Dreams" by Roy Orbison, "To Mars" by Early Man, "Fend You Off" by Zeal and Ardor, and "The Pink Room" by David Lynch. Send feedback to: dreadmediapodcast@gmail.com. Follow @DevilDinosaurJr and @dreadmedia on Twitter! Join the Facebook group! Support the show at www.patreon.com/dreadmedia. Visit www.desmondreddick.com, www.stayscary.wordpress.com, www.dreadmedia.bandcamp.com, www.kccinephile.com, and www.dejasdomicileofdread.blogspot.com.

This week, Desmond and Tom review a newish (2016) film from a favorite director: Takashi Miike. The film in question is the wild sci-fi manga adaptation Terra Formars. Then Des goes solo on a Dread Media Top 5 Takashi Miike Films. And we pay tribute to one of the great American artists: David Lynch. Songs included: "In Dreams" by Roy Orbison, "To Mars" by Early Man, "Fend You Off" by Zeal and Ardor, and "The Pink Room" by David Lynch. Send feedback to: dreadmediapodcast@gmail.com. Follow @DevilDinosaurJr and @dreadmedia on Twitter! Join the Facebook group! Support the show at www.patreon.com/dreadmedia. Visit www.desmondreddick.com, www.stayscary.wordpress.com, www.dreadmedia.bandcamp.com, www.kccinephile.com, and www.dejasdomicileofdread.blogspot.com.

Join us as we FINALLY get around to covering one of the most recent Looney projects with the TV-Y7 show, Bugs Bunny Builders! Jordan sees Bugs and crew build a waterslide for mayor Foghorn Leghorn in 'Splash Zone' Marc sees the Builders go TO MARS to handle K-9 in 'K-9 Spacy Puppy' And we both see the return of a classic Looney character in a new light with 'Catwalk' LINKS: Support That's Not Quite All Folks On Patreon Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Bluesky Follow us on Instagram

On the quest to find the best beach in the galaxy, Mindy and Guy Raz need to travel a little far from home. How far from home, you ask?! To Mars of course! Join Mindy and Guy Raz on this intergalactic adventure to Mars as they learn about recent NASA research about the beaches of Mars! It's the who, what, when, where, how and WOW of Mars Beaches! Originally aired 10/11/21.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

GOOD EVENING: The show begins on Columbia campus after the violence and during the occupation by the NYPD. To Lancaster County and the busy diners with $3.00 beer pitchers. To the future to puzzle nuclear war in space. To SCOTUS re: the immunity arguments for former President Trump. To the 17th century and the escape of Henry Avery, the king of pirates, and his close pal, Daniel Defoe. Lastly, to Redondo Beach with Jeff Bliss. To Turin for the Giornale d'Italia. To Mars to search for sites for helicopters or drones to explore. 1910 Harvard 0, Yale 0

Good evening. The show begins in Tehran, curious what gave the Mullahs confidence to order 300 or 700 missiles and drones fired at Israel. To Kyiv, without air defense; to Kharkiv, surrounded. To France for the price of energy; to Jerusalem to wait on the target. To Beijing, to Taiwan, to Ottawa and the Chinese saboteurs. To the north of Israel and casualties from a drone strike. To Mars, where the samples await a Starship. To Ceres and freshwater ice in shadowed craters. To Caracas, Santiago, Buenos Aires, La Paz, and more. 1902 Rome

TONIGHT: The show begins in Times Square, with Harry Siegel of TheCity sorting out what is known of a confrontation between migrants and the NYPD.  ToWestern Pennsylvania and the fracking fields. To Milan for a report on the farmers protesting taxes and subsidies. To Las Vegas for the Super Bowl.  To New Zealand for reporting on the healthy economy nd the burst of immigrtion in 2023. To SCOTUS, to the 25th Amendment. To Augusta Maine, to Brunswick Maine, to the Gettysburg Reunion 1913.. To Lancaster County, to the Las Vegas  atomic tests of the 1950s. To Mars and Mimas of Saturn. 1790 Naples CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR FIRST HOUR 9-915 #NYC: Puzzling new video footage of the January 27 confrontation between NYPD and migrants in Times Square.. Harry Siegel, TheCuty.com https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/02/08/times-square-migrants-arrests-body-camera-footage-contradicts-nypd-account/ 915-930 #CALIFORNIA: Governor  Newsom  spies a Target shoplifting event. Bill Whalen, Hover https://www.hoover.org/research/newsom-goes-target-and-puts-bullseye-prop-47 930-945 #KeystoneReport: LNG and the senior Democrats of Pennsylvania ask for a reversal Salena Zito, Middle of Somewhere, @DCExaminer, SalenaZito.com https://salenazito.com/2024/02/01/democrats-say-bidens-pause-on-lng-is-like-throwing-a-match-in-a-bail-of-hay/ 945-1000 #Italy: Farmers rally for remedies; Overtourism and the unacceptable swimming in the Trevi Fountain https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240205-italy-battles-over-tourism-with-loudspeaker-bans-airbnb-crackdown SECOND HOUR 10-1015 #PacificWatch: Vegas extravaganza runs out of private jet parking  @JCBliss https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/las-vegas-super-bowl-headache/ar-BB1i1z9G 1015-1030 #OCEANIA: #KIWIS:  #NEWZEALAND: Economy humming and immigration welcome. Reuben Steff, Waikato University. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-06/new-zealand-jobless-rate-rises-less-than-economists-forecast?cmpid=BBD020724_AUSTRALIA&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=240207&utm_campaign=australia&sref=5g4GmFHo 1030-1045 #SCOTUS: The 14th Amendment, Section 3: Self-executing or not? Richard Epstein, Hoover https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/02/09/the-supreme-court-hints-it-will-keep-donald-trump-on-the-ballot 1045-1100 ##POTUS: 25th Amendment., Section 3. Richard Epstein, Hoover https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxve THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 5/8: On Great Fields: The Life and Unlikely Heroism of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain  by  Ronald C. White  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Great-Fields-Unlikely-Lawrence-Chamberlain/dp/0525510087/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1707433634&sr=1-1 Before 1862, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain had rarely left his home state of Maine, where he was a trained minister and mild-mannered professor at Bowdoin College. His colleagues were shocked when he volunteered for the Union army, but he was undeterred and later became known as one of the North's greatest heroes: On the second day at Gettysburg, after running out of ammunition at Little Round Top, he ordered his men to wield their bayonets in a desperate charge down a rocky slope that routed the Confederate attackers. Despite being wounded at Petersburg—and told by two surgeons he would die—Chamberlain survived the war, going on to be elected governor of Maine four times and serve as president of Bowdoin College. 1115-1130 6/8: On Great Fields: The Life and Unlikely Heroism of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain  by  Ronald C. White  (Author) 1130-1145 7/8: On Great Fields: The Life and Unlikely Heroism of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain  by  Ronald C. White  (Author) 1145-1200 8/8: On Great Fields: The Life and Unlikely Heroism of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain  by  Ronald C. White  FOURTH HOUR 12-1215   #LancasterCountyReport: Diners overflowing, Costco surging. Jim McTague, former Washington Editor, Barrons. @MCTagueJ.  Author of the "Martin and Twyla Boundary Series."  #FriendsofHistoryDebatingSociety 1215-1230 #NUKES: The madness of Theater Nuclear Weapons, 1953-2024. Henry Sokolski, NPEC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIR-2_Genie MGR-1 Honest John free flight rocket delivering W7 and later W31 nuclear weapons, 1953–1985. M65 Atomic Cannon delivering 280mm W9 and W19 nuclear shells, 1953–1963. MGM-5 Corporal missile delivering W7 nuclear weapon, 1955–1964. 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun on the Iowa-class battleship delivering 406 mm W23 nuclear shells, 1956–1962. PGM-11 Redstone missile delivering the W39 nuclear weapon, 1958-1964 M110 howitzer and M115 howitzer delivering 203mm W33 nuclear shell, 1957–1992. M-28/M-29 Davy Crockett (nuclear device) M-388 warhead derived from W54, 1961–1971. MGR-3 Little John free flight rocket delivering W45 nuclear weapon, 1962–1969. MGM-18 Lacrosse missile with W40 nuclear warhead, 1959–1964. M109 self-propelled, M114 towed howitzers and M198 towed howitzers delivering 155mm W48, 1963–1992. MGM-29 Sergeant missile delivering W52 nuclear weapon, 1962–1979. MGM-31 Pershing missile delivering W50 nuclear weapon, 1962–1969 for Pershing 1, 1969–1991 for Pershing 1a. MGM-52 Lance missile delivering W70 nuclear weapon, 1972–1992. M110 howitzer and M115 howitzer delivering 203mm W79 nuclear shell, 1976–1992. 1230-1245 #MARS: Smithsonian of Mars: Ingenuity. Bob Zimmerman BehindtheBlack.com https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/perseverance-snaps-its-first-picture-of-grounded-ingenuity/ 1245-100 am #ISS: Dream Chaser to LEO. Bob Zimmerman BehindtheBlack.com https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/nasa-the-flight-plan-for-dream-chaser-tenacitys-first-demo-mission-to-iss/

#TONIGHT: The show begins in Las Vegas on a not quite 2 acre undeveloped land between the Belagio and the Cosmopolitan hoytels selling to MGM for $54 million. Then to Oakland and the closing of the popular In-N-Out franchise near the airport because of waves of crime.  To Philadelphia for a report on small business in America. Then to Western PA, to Ukraine and the proposed new nuclear reactors with EU money. To Mars to say wel done to the last flight of Ingenuity. To Pyongyang now allied with Moscow. To Rome, to Turin, to Bolgna.  To Lancaster County, PA and Havana, Cuba. 1940 Las Vegas 

TONIGHT: The show begins in Yemen, asking why the USN attacks the launch sites and not the chiain of command? nd not the source of the missiles and drones? To Gaza and the tunnels from Khan Younis to Rafeh and? Then to Kyiv, out of ammon; to Brussels and promising ammo by 2025. To Taipei, to Cambrudge, to Ottawa, to the missile silos of the #PRC. Then to Ukraine to ask how long it can withstand the Russia barrages that it can no longer stop reliably? To Mars in search of Ingenuity. To Quito, Brasilia, San Salvador and the prisons of Central America filled with tens of thousands of young males suspects. 1913 Manitoba

TONIGHT:  The show begins in Pennsylvania with Salena Zito, in order to explore the inquiry, can a Third Party candidate such as Joe Manchin carry Pa.  Then to Conrad Black in Toronto, to celebrate his new book: The Political and Strategic History of the World, Vol I: From Antiquity to the Caesars, 14 A.D.. Then to Philadelphia, to Yemen, Las Vegas, Boca Chica.  To Mars equator, to the bin Laden compound 2011.  To Lancaster County Pa and breakfast at the Park City Diner.  And last to LEO, MEO, GEO and space war prep. 1913 GETTYSBURG 5OTH ANNIVERSARY CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR FIRST HOUR 9-915 #KeystoneReport: Can a Third Party win in Pennsylvania? Salena Zito, Middle of Somewhere, @DCExaminer Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, New York Post, SalenaZito.com https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2799639/we-can-elect-a-third-party-candidate-but-not-the-way-you-think/ 915-930 #Canada: It is possible to construct a political history of civilization from antiquity to the Death of Augustus Caesar, 14A.D. Conrad Black. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CMCP8SKC?psc=1&smid=A37DFYOENRKCVH&ref_=chk_typ_imgToDp 930-945 #SmallBusinessAmerica: Housing starts down but builder confidence up. @GeneMarks  @Guardian @PhillyInquirer https://www.nahb.org/news-and-economics/press-releases/2024/01/builder-sentiment-surges-on-falling-interest-rates 945-1000 #SmallBusinessAmerica: Boomers Rule Small Business, Still.  @GeneMarks  @Guardian @PhillyInquirer https://genemarks.medium.com/dont-laugh-boomers-still-rule-the-world-for-now-fce85df76fac SECOND HOUR 10-1015 ##Houthis: The correct meaning of "genocide" and the Houthis are a genocidal cult. Cliff May, FDD https://www.fdd.org/analysis/op_eds/2024/01/17/the-blood-libel-at-the-hague/ 1015-1030 #PacificWatch: The Sphere goes to the super Bowl@JCBliss https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/nfl/article-12984131/Super-Bowl-LVIII-CBS-Sports-chiefs-reveal-Las-Vegas-Sphere-used-coverage-NFL-showpiece.html 1030-1045 #SPACEX:  Boca Chica Mall and Diner. Bob Zimmerman BehindtheBlack.com https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/spacex-files-for-permits-to-build-a-shopping-center-and-restaurant-at-boca-chica/ 1045-1100 ##Hubble: #JamesWebb: Early galaxies were not normal shapes.. Bob Zimmerman BehindtheBlack.com https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/webb-confirms-the-unusual-shape-of-early-galaxies-as-seen-by-hubble/ THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 5/8: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Hardcover – October 17, 2023 by  Liza Mundy  (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Sisterhood-Secret-History-Women-CIA/dp/0593238176/ref=asc_df_0593238176&mcid=d8b024f8944a3cfb869a04c0b84ba964?tag=bngsmtphsnus-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=80608071597838&hvnetw=s&hvqmt=e&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-4584207596928557&psc=1 Created in the aftermath of World War II, the Central Intelligence Agency relied on women even as it attempted to channel their talents and keep them down. Women sent cables, made dead drops, and maintained the agency's secrets. Despite discrimination—even because of it—women who started as clerks, secretaries, or unpaid spouses rose to become some of the CIA's shrewdest operatives. They were unlikely spies—and that's exactly what made them perfect for the role. Because women were seen as unimportant, pioneering female intelligence officers moved unnoticed around Bonn, Geneva, and Moscow, stealing secrets from under the noses of their KGB adversaries. Back at headquarters, women built the CIA's critical archives—first by hand, then by computer. And they noticed things that the men at the top didn't see. As the CIA faced an identity crisis after the Cold War, it was a close-knit network of female analysts who spotted the rising threat of al-Qaeda—though their warnings were repeatedly brushed aside. After the 9/11 attacks, more women joined the agency as a new job, targeter, came to prominence. They showed that data analysis would be crucial to the post-9/11 national security landscape—an effort that culminated spectacularly in the CIA's successful effort to track down bin Laden in his Pakistani compound. Propelled by the same meticulous reporting and vivid storytelling that infused Code Girls, The Sisterhood offers a riveting new perspective on history, revealing how women at the CIA ushered in the modern intelligence age, and how their silencing made the world more dangerous. 1115-1130 6/8: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Hardcover – October 17, 2023 by  Liza Mundy  (Author) 1130-1145 7/8: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Hardcover – October 17, 2023 by  Liza Mundy  (Author) 1145-1200 8/8: The Sisterhood: The Secret History of Women at the CIA Hardcover – October 17, 2023 by  Liza Mundy  (Author) FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 #MrMarket: #SoftData: Breakfast plates as big as hubcaps and the Apple Store jammed in Lancaster County.   Jim McTague, former Washington Editor, Barrons. @MCTagueJ.  Author of the "Martin and Twyla Boundary Series."  #FriendsofHistoryDebatingSociety https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumers/us-retail-sales-report-2024-030eaa0a 1215-1230 #Italy: Italy struggles to fend off  the migrants from Tunisia rescued by NGO migration activists. https://apnews.com/article/italy-migration-rescue-ships-meloni-52d3137cb7a88aff6c169d52d1ea830e 1230-1245 #Ukraine: Out of ammo as the US Congress and the GOP turn away. Josh Rogin Wasington Post. also''https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/01/19/ukraine-aid-cut-likely-johnson-house-republicans/ 1245-100 am ##SpaceForce: Preparing the battlefield in LEO, MEO, GEO. Henry Sokolski, NPEC https://x.com/nuclearpolicy/status/1747659993388900534?s=46&t=hKg5MoZJk-45c078Ps82KA

On the quest to find the best beach in the galaxy, Mindy and Guy Raz need to travel a little far from home. How far from home, you ask?! To Mars of course! Join Mindy and Guy Raz on this intergalactic adventure to Mars as they learn about recent NASA research about the beaches of Mars! It's the who, what, when, where, how and WOW of Mars Beaches! Originally aired 10/11/21.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Tinkercast Presents: Outer Space Week! On the quest to find the best beach in the galaxy, Mindy and Guy Raz need to travel a little far from home. How far from home, you ask?! To Mars of course! Join Mindy and Guy Raz on this intergalactic adventure to Mars as they learn about recent NASA research about the beaches of Mars! It's the who, what, when, where, how and WOW of Mars Beaches! Check Wow in the World activities at https://bit.ly/3V5YCgw.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On the quest to find the best beach in the galaxy, Mindy and Guy Raz need to travel a little far from home. How far from home, you ask?! To Mars of course! Join Mindy and Guy Raz on this intergalactic adventure to Mars as they learn about recent NASA research about the beaches of Mars! It's the who, what, when, where, how and WOW of Mars Beaches! Originally aired 10/11/21.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On the quest to find the best beach in the galaxy, Mindy and Guy Raz need to travel a little far from home. How far from home, you ask?! To Mars of course! Join Mindy and Guy Raz on this intergalactic adventure to Mars as they learn about recent NASA research about the beaches of Mars! It's the who, what, when, where, how and WOW of Mars Beaches!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today's guest is soon to be on the lookout to borrow some moving boxes… He's planning on relocating. To Mars. For the REST. OF. HIS. LIFE. A Physicist, Explosives Engineer, Soldier, Comedian, Astronaut Candidate - one thing Josh Richards can never be accused of is being boring. After a decade of picking up booby traps with the Australian Army, slogging through mud with British Commandos, being science adviser to the richest artist in the world, and performing comedy wearing a giant koala suit to confused audiences around the world, Josh found his true calling in September 2012 when he discovered the Mars One project. I'm sure like me you want to know all the things… How many pairs of undies will Josh take? What's for dinner out there? Does he have to wear a space suit for the rest of his life? What if he falls in love before he leaves? TIFFANEE COOK Linktree: https://linktr.ee/rollwiththepunches Website: www.rollwiththepunches.com.au LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/tiffaneecook/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/rollwiththepunchespodcast Instagram: www.instagram.com/rollwiththepunches_podcast Instagram: www.instagram.com/tiffaneeandco --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/roll-withthepunches/message

Yulia Akisheva is an aerospace engineer by training currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Protective Use of Regolith for Planetary and Lunar Exploration or PURPLE in short. This Ph.D. is supported by the European Space Agency (ESA), TRAD Tests & Radiations, and ISAE-SUPAERO under the ESA OSIP collaboration platform. Yulia has a continually growing passion for human spaceflight. Since over a decade ago, she knew she wanted to work on putting that first human boot on Mars so she invested in her academic background. Yulia has three Master's degrees from top European universities, KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden and ISAE-SUPAERO in France. She specialized in Aerospace Structures and Materials, Design and Operation of Space Systems, and Sciences of the Mechanics of Materials and Structures. Besides Mars exploration, Yulia is strongly interested in fostering international cooperation and outreach about space. She contributes to building a more diverse and inclusive aerospace sector as a volunteer at Space Generation Advisory Council, and you can find Yulia's TEDx called “To Mars together: 5 reasons to explore the Red Planet” on youtube. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/spaceexplr/support

(Please hum Star Trek theme) Bruce Betts, Chief Scientist of the Planetary Society, takes John and Don where no Musical Innertube has gone before (except maybe our first episode with Mat Kaplan)! To Mars!  In an airplane!

Remember, we welcome comments, questions and suggested topics at thewonderpodcastQs@gmail.com   S2E09 TRANSCRIPT: ----more---- Yucca: Welcome back to the Wonder Science-based Paganism. I'm your host Yucca Mark: And I'm your host, Mark. Yucca: And this week we're actually talking about science. And how science plays into science-based paganism, what science really is, and a little bit around the current events with the relationship of science and paganism. Mark: Right. This subject is very timely as it turns out. We've been wanting to do this episode for a while. But as it turns out, there is a sort of controversial thread on Starhawk's Facebook page currently in which she expressed her happiness about getting the second installment of the COVID-19 vaccination and really had a number of people, I wouldn't say a majority, but quite a number of people, very hostile to vaccination, very hostile to the pharmaceutical industry, science products and really attacking her quite a bit personally for her going along with what we currently know in, in terms of medical science for addressing COVID-19. So we felt that it would be a good time to talk about science what it is, what it, isn't, how that dovetails with our scientific, science-based pagan practices and what that all means, how that all fits together. Yucca: Exactly. Yeah. So a huge amount to cover here. Mark: Yes. Yucca: So let's dive in. I think we should actually start with the topic of what is science in the first place, because this is an area where as important as it is in our lives, there's a tremendous amount of misconception around just the concept of science itself. Mark: Yes indeed. One of the, one of those misconceptions is something that atheists encounter quite a bit in their conversation with people who are, I guess what I would call credulous religionists people who have beliefs that are not evidence-based, but are more experiential based. So they believe things because they've had experiences or simply because they've been told that they're true by people who they believe. And that accusation is that atheists, and this would also be true of godless pagans, worship science or that our our trust in the products of science is as much faith based as the faith based Willie of someone who believes in God's, for example hear that pretty frequently in those circles. And it's not true. But in order to understand that it's not true you need to know what science is to begin with and what it's not. Science is not an assertion of a cosmology apropos of nothing. That's not what it is. It's not an assertion that these things are true and you must believe them. It's an evidence-based process. Yucca: So let's start by unpacking what somebody could mean when they say science. So typically in the English speaking world, if we say science, there's one of three things that we could be referring to. And first and foremost, science is a process. It's a process of inquiry of learning about the world and in school, they might've made you memorize the scientific method or the scientific process that you had to go through in each of the steps and observation, and hypothesis and all of that. And that's an idealized version of the process. In real life it's never so cut and dry and clean. It's very messy. But that's what we're doing. Now, science, when someone says science, they could also be referring to the body of knowledge, which has been gained through that. Process. So if you take a biology course or you pick up a book about physics, those are talking about the things that we have learned by doing science. Now, the third way that the word gets used is science can also refer to the institutions or the people who practice science. So when you read a headline that says science says XYZ is bad for you. Well, science as an a process can't say anything. It's a process. It's a tool that we're using a body of knowledge. Can't say anything, but institutions can take positions. They can draw conclusions, individual scientists can. The word can be used to mean any of those three things, but it's technical meaning really is that process of inquiry and there's, it's not just, Oh, I ask a question. I have to ask very specific kinds of questions for them to be scientific. They have to be independently, the evidence has to be independently verifiable and it has to be reproducible. It can't, to be scientific, it can't be just an experience that I personally had that no one else can verify. If I do an experiment, the results that I get have to be, somebody else in another lab on the other side of the world, or on, out in the field, has to be able to get those same results and to replicate that. Mark: In order for the hypothesis to be verified. Yucca: Yes. Yes. And you have to, when you set up your experiment, it has to be set up in such a way that you can disprove or support your hypothesis. And I'm kind of jumping around here but that leads me to one other really important thing that I want to, conceptual thing, that I want to bring up, which is in science, you cannot prove a hypothesis. There's mathematical proofs, it's a legal term. You can disprove. But you could only add evidence in support of an idea. Now, when you have enough evidence becomes overwhelming and we then switched to talking about that idea as a fact, we're always learning more, always coming back and refining our understanding, looking for the exceptions and rewriting the story. There's things that we took for granted that we put in textbooks for years, and then we go, Oh wait, the data doesn't support that. Mark: There's new data and it doesn't support. Yucca: And when that happens, that's exciting. That's where the good stuff is. Look for where the data conflicts with our previous understanding and, whole new fields spring out of that. Mark: I think it was Richard Fineman. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it was the physicist Richard Fineman, who said the most exciting words in science are not Eureka it's that's funny. Yucca: Exactly. And I also want to step back for a moment and say that, my background is I'm a scientist, so I'm an ecologist. And then I later went into the space sciences into planetary science. So I work both as an independent ecologist and am also a science teacher. So I get really fired up about all of this, but we often in our culture have this idea where. As though science is close to only certain people, you have to have a degree in this field or else you can't possibly be an authority in it, or you have to have your PhD and this and that, and have done your postdoc over here, right. Where there is use in there being in someone, having a degree in an area. But that is only the start. Most scientists, their knowledge. Yeah. They spent a few years in school and they learned some really important processes there. And some of the ethics that guide whatever their field is, but the real knowledge comes from the continual learning. Always going back, learning more, reading the literature in your field, experimenting. And that's not something that's just limited to someone who's got a degree. Everybody can do that. That's something that, and personally, I think that's a responsibility that we, as citizens of the modern world have. To be able to make informed decisions that are going to influence the direction that our society and our ecosystems and our world go in. Mark: I agree. I agree. And the term that we use for that is science literacy, which is much less about absorbing A pattern of facts and much more about understanding the thinking process that's involved in analyzing a given proposed statement so that we, as scientifically literate, people can look at a given proposal and say, well, Is that true or not, or is it likely to be true or not? And what is the available evidence that points towards it? And is there available evidence that contradicts it? What is the relative weight of that evidence that we're going to consider? Is it just somebody say so, or is it the consensus of a whole bunch of studies that have been done independently in order to draw the conclusion that they've drawn? And that's something called the hierarchy of evidence. Which is an important aspect of doing scientific analysis. I do not call myself a scientist because I'm not one, I don't do science. And I don't have a degree in it. I took a bunch of courses in college. But what I am is someone who's really fired up about science and has been since he was very young. And so I am an autodidact in various scientific fields. I'm interested in cosmological physics. I'm interested in planetary science. I'm very interested in physical anthropology and human evolution. These are fields that I am always pouring over the internet to learn things about because they just happened to scratch a particular itch that I have to want to know more. Curiosity is at the heart science. Yucca: Excuse me Mark: Go ahead. Yucca: I think you worked in conservation for many years. Didn't you? Have so a field that, that is very heavy leaf science-based with some other fields in tied in there as well. Mark: At its best. It's very science-based at its worst, it's sort of just opposed to change. I have, I've seen and, you know, regrettably been a part of some self-styled environmental efforts that were really just about, you know, people not wanting more houses in their neighborhood or more traffic or for their nice view to be spoiled. And it's not that spoiling a nice view. Isn't something important. I consider beauty to be a really important, element of human experience. In fact, it's one of the four sacred pillars in atheopagan . But that's not as science driven as say conservation of a wetland area for a set of endangered species which is more the kind of work that I prefer to do. Yucca: I pulled you away though. You are on a beautiful train of thought there about curiosity being the heart of inquiry and Mark: Well, yes. I mean, we have these four brains, right? We have these frontal neocortexes, and what they seek is answers because. That is our superpower as humans. We aren't fast. We aren't strong. We don't have, you know, giant teeth and claws. We are soft, squishy, slow extremely vulnerable organisms. But what we can do is we can think in our capacity to think, and our curiosity about the nature of the world enables us to do extraordinary things. Thanks. Yucca: Yeah. I mean, just this last month alone has shown some of the amazing things that we can do, especially when we work together on this stuff. I mean, last month we. Landed Perseverance on Mars, which has a little drone on it, right. Flying in another world's atmosphere. And that it's the one of many that have come before it. And all of the other missions that are there too. So the HOPE mission and Tianwen 1 mission. And we're just reaching out and exploring and answering questions that, that our ancestors could only dream to be able to answer questions like that for. Mark: Right. And of course the deepest question that Perseverance is designed to inquire into is are we alone? It's looking for life. It's looking for signs that life existed on Mars. And of course by a, and I don't mean are there other intelligent beings that were on Mars? That's not that's not what I'm talking about, but life, if life was on Mars, the way that it is on and perhaps still is deep in the soil, we don't know. But if life was on Mars, the way that it is on Earth, that means that life is not a fluke. It means that it's kind of common, right? Given the conditions life will arise. And that has profound impacts for every year aspect of human exploration, everything from art and philosophy and religion to to the scientific disciplines. So this curiosity, this burning curiosity in humanity, And our soaring imagination, our capacity to dream of these questions and their possible answers. It's deeply moving and inspiring. And so the scientific enterprise, it's not just. This sort of dry fact-finding mission. It is, it's kind of at the heart of the human project. Yucca: And I want to take a quick tangent about Perseverance mission for the search for life. One of the questions that I hear voiced quite often as, okay. So if there's life on Mars now, it's almost certainly not on the surface because Mars has lost most of its atmosphere. It's still has quite a bit of atmosphere compared to many other places, but the radiation environments very high, the temperatures can be quite extreme if it's there, it's almost certainly not on the surface. It's going to be several meters down. It's going to be at the. Polar ice caps, maybe in subsurface lakes. So why are we searching on the surface where we're fairly sure there is no current life? And the assumptions behind that is that if life is that now there's certainly more dead things than living. That's the case here on Earth. But also, the life which could have developed if it followed the same path as life on Earth during the short period of time that Mars was a wet, warm world. So there was about a billion year period. Mars actually was what we'd consider habitable before we were during its Noachian period. Well, the life would have most likely been microscopic at the time. But that would have influenced the chemistry of the lake bed, where we're searching currently. We're looking for what the chemical signs left behind. Types of minerals that could only form in the presence of organic matter or in the presence of these processes, which are not possible, as far as we can tell, abiotically. So we're searching where we can, and then we have the major ethical questions to then look at is okay. If we find those signatures, then we might go and look in the places where we might think that they'd be. But if they are there, we have to really think carefully about the possibility of contamination. Mark: Right, Yucca: Right. Do we want to introduce Earth life? To Mars and perhaps back to Mars, because the very popular hypothesis is that we come from Mars, that life developed first on Mars and then hitchhiked to Earth. Mark: In raining down in, in meteorites that had been struck off of Mars. Yucca: Yeah. Quite easy to go down the gravity hill. Right. So this is one of the questions that Perseverance and the other rovers and experiments might help us find out is are we Martians? Where are we from? Right. And that really changes our view of ourselves and our place in the cosmos. Mark: Yes. And as you can hear in the animation, in our voices, this is tremendously exciting stuff. The implications of this for just our understanding of ourselves and who we are and what we're doing here are really profound. So, you know, science, isn't just people titrating with glassware in a laboratory wearing white coats. It is, it's the search for it's the search for the text of reality. The factual nature of the objective world that we live in, the objective universe that we live in. Now that said there are questions that science cannot answer. And anyone who's involved with science, who's honest about it will acknowledge that this is the case ethical questions, for example. I may get sidetracked into game theory later on, but I'm not going to do that right now. Questions about morality are not, they do not lend themselves to the scientific process. Very well. We were not going to run an experiment where we take a population of people and say, okay, 50% of you murder is okay. 50% of the murder is not okay. Now we're going to run the experiment and see how well your society gets along. That's it's not going to happen. Yucca: Well, there, there are ways to set experiments up like that in a way that would be falsifiable. And that is what makes it scientific or not. But you couldn't answer a question like is what's the best color? What is the meaning of this song? You could answer questions like perhaps do humans have an instinctual morality, right? This is something that has been investigated. And we're leaning towards saying yes, there are certain things which are instinctual we've talked about before, like the idea of reciprocity and things like that are instinctually ingrained into us as animals where other animals have different things ingrained in them. So the what question you are asking is something that has to, you have to be able to test it. And if you can't test it, it's not scientific. That doesn't mean it's not valuable. That doesn't mean it doesn't have meaning in our lives. It's just not science and science doesn't answer that. Now there are certain questions, which right now are not scientific or unscientific, but one day may become scientific. Mark: Yes. Yucca: Multiverse questions for instance. Mark: Well, or they're even, here on Earth, which at one time were not scientifically testable, but now are I think of the question from the film and book contact by Carl Sagan, where the preacher character Palmer, Joss asks of Ellie, the the astronomer. Did you love your father? And she says, yes. And he says, prove it. And the truth is that when we talk about the brain experience of love, if you put a bunch of electrodes in somebody's head, you can actually track that there is a particular kind of state that equates to our felt sense of love, but that, so it is possible to prove these things, but that doesn't mean that's necessarily the most meaningful way of approaching that kind of a question. Science is a very powerful and robust set of tools, but it's not a universal set of tools. There are questions that we have to answer for ourselves around right and wrong and around qualitative betterness or worseness, that's a bad construction. That, that science is really not. You know, science is just not the way you're going to approach these things. So that leads me to want to talk about scientism. Does that seem like a good place to go? Now there's so much in this topic, honestly, you know, we were talking before we started recording and we realized, yes, exactly. We, we We realized early on, there's probably way more of this than will fit in a podcast, but we'll do our best. One of the accusations that I have seen in atheist circles a lot in the conversations between religionists, what I call credulous religionists, who are people who believe in things for which there is scant or no scientifically credible evidence. Like gods or souls or spirits or ghosts or magic, things like that. Those folks will often accuse people who use science as a system for defining the cosmology that they subscribed to as subscribing to scientism and scientism is portrayed as science as a religion that you just, you believe in it and it's faith based and you just believe in it because you believe in it. And it's just a choice, just like choosing to believe in Vishnu or Apollo. There are real problems with that proposal because the nature of science, first of all, is not to be declarative about what is true. What science says is according to the evidence we have thus far with the best analysis we've been able to apply, this is what is most likely to be true. And in some cases, that evidence is so overwhelming that we talk about those things as facts. I joked before the, the show started, gravity is real. We we have enough evidence available that nobody is not subject to gravity and it's not subject to what you believe in. Gravity is just real. Yucca: Sure. On some very large scales, Mark: yes, Yucca: Do we understand it properly. There are some real questions there, but right now, If I jump up, I'm falling back to Earth. Mark: You're going to fall back to Earth. Exactly. So, so this, what that means is that the body of knowledge that is accumulated together, which is some kind of sometimes termed as science, that body of knowledge is all a set of probabilistic guesses, based on evidence about what is most likely to be true. And the based on evidence part is the real difference, because, you know, I had an experience where where I heard a voice in my head and I believe that it was, you know, Vishnu talking to me. That is not scientifically credible evidence. It's not reproducible. It's not capturable in any way. And there are other explanations for that kind of phenomenon happening that are more likely to be true. So the accusation of scientism I feel has to do with a lack of understanding about what science really is. And in some cases and then willingness to understand what science really is, a desire that science be a faith based process. Like those others. But it isn't faith-based. That said it is a human enterprise and human enterprises have human frailties built into them. There's something called confirmation bias. We're all subject to it. Confirmation bias is seeing what you want to see. You know, the seeing what you want to confirm, what you already believe. And scientists are as subject to this as everybody else, which is why we have these double blind experiments in order to take the observer out of the equation of what the outcome of the experiment is. Because if we just leave it up to humans, to judge, they're going to go with their biases, they it's inevitable that they will. And there are some unethical scientists who cling to their beloved theory, even when the evidence flies in its face. That's a problem. There are some scientists who are unethical, who are paid by grants or other funding from particular sources that want the outcome of the science to be a particular way. And the scientist cooperates. That is a problem. Yucca: Although I'd like to say that is far less of an issue than is often accused. And when you look at within the peer reviewed world there in any journal worth its salt, there's the declarations in the actual article. So you can go and look, okay, are there any conflicts or anything that needs to be declared about the relationships between the authors and the subjects that they're presenting. Mark: Right, right. But all of this is to say that it's a human enterprise and humans have failings, and those can get sewn into the findings of certain studies. But the solution to that is not to throw science out. The solution is better science, exactly science that does not involve people that are so locked into their confirmation biases, that they can't let them go. Science that's done, you know, without people feeling pressure from their funders. So that's the beautiful thing about science is that it's, self-correcting the peer review process whereby other experts take a look at your out your results and do their best to tear it apart. Okay. Is a really powerful element of the scientific method. So once you've published your results, Oh boy, I found something. This is great. Then everybody in the world does their best to say, no, you didn't find anything here. Your methodology was flawed and your data was dirty and no. And maybe they're successful and they're right. And now you've learned something. Maybe they're unsuccessful and you were right. And now you've learned something. So in either case it's very important this constant accretion of experimental and evidential body of knowledge and then analysis of it. And then and then Prosecution of inquiry into those results to see whether they really stand up. It's all very important and it gives us knowledge with a high degree of certainty. In many cases. Yucca: And I do want to speak for a moment to the peer reviewed process. It is incredible on many fronts and gives us just as you've been talking about a high level of certainty, it is one of the areas where it really highlighted that science is a human endeavor and that it is fraught with human problems. And one of the challenges with the peer reviewed process is that it often can entrench pre-existing biases. There's a lot of examples. One of the classic examples is Dr. Eugene Parker and his idea of the solar wind. And that kept, he tried publishing multiple times the The experts in the V in the field that were reviewing his paper, kept throwing it out. Eventually it was published and he was then later vindicated. We found the solar wind, and now we have a probe named after him, which is incredibly rare to have a space mission named after a living individual. But there are many instances in which changing a paradigm is blocked by this process. So it's a process that helps us on many fronts, but has challenges on other fronts. And sometimes people will latch onto, well, here's the challenge with peer reviewed, or there's a challenge that there's a minority of scientists who are being paid or the challenge in what you can get funding for. But again, we don't want to throw the whole process out. We don't want to throw science out with that bath water because the science as a tool and even as an institution has allowed us to achieve and learn so much too that the world that we live in today would be unrecognizable to just a few generations back. Mark: Yes. Yes. Yes. And so this, you know, a lot of what we've been explaining here is this sort of love song to science, which is, you know, a wonderful thing, but I'd like to bring it back a little bit now, to science-based paganism and what that means to us and what that means in the broader context of the pagan umbrella of various kinds of faiths and paths. I initially stepped away from the pagan community after practicing with it for 27 years. No, that's not right. 22 years. Because of experiences that I had that just were so far out of consistency with anything that could be scientifically validated that I just became incredibly uncomfortable. And then that got exacerbated by two instances where people used supernatural explanations to excuse really unethical behavior, in my opinion, and that, I mean, at that moment, it's like, well, you could excuse anything because you can just say that, you know, some spirit told you to do it or Yucca: God wanted it. Mark: Yeah, exactly. And we've certainly seen through history, what, what can happen. The horrible things that can happen when somebody says God wants it. And so I stepped away and I mean, you've heard this story before. I, I. I started to miss it a lot. And that got me into an inquiry about, well, what is religion? How does that, what does that have to do with the brain? What in the human organism is religion serving, right? And what I came back to was a frame, a framing of a particular path within science-based paganism called atheopagan ism. And the reason that the science base is so important is that it gives us a solid evidentiary base. For understanding the nature of the universe that we live in which we can then celebrate Revere live in service to it, it provides the foundation on which a rich, emotionally satisfying ethically coherent religious practice can be built. And that is why that's why I'm on this podcast right now. It's why I'm doing the things that I'm doing to promote science-based paganism in the world. My, my belief personally, is that the world, as it is the world as described by science is so marvelous, so extraordinary and beautiful and amazing and strange and mysterious. And. All of those, you know, kind of super-light of adjectives that I don't need or want anything else to worship or celebrate or revere in order to have a very rich and abundant life. And that doesn't mean that those other things don't exist. It means that they don't meet an evidentiary standard that I find compelling. Well, I'll leave it there. How about you? Yucca. Yucca: Well, I mean, there's so many directions to go with this. I want to come to the idea of, so we've been talking about what science is and what scientists do and all of this, and, but bringing it back to being pagan and how that informs our understanding of the world of ourselves, of existence, where most pagans, and most of us in our daily lives are not doing formal science. There's a lot of pagans who are scientists, right. That's really common. I think the very first episode has shared that in my early 20 years being at LANL with a bunch of the LANL folks. So Los Alamos National Laboratory, that a ton of them were pagans. Right. That's really common. But in everyday life how we use science as a way of understanding and informing our decisions around the world, what is this being science based? And I think that for me, well, one it's using the scientific method in my daily life, but also informing my understanding on things that I value and the choices that I make looking at what we have learned from science about these things and lifestyle choices. In my way of understanding what ritual is or how can I level up my ritual? Okay. I want to level up my ritual. I'm going to go read as much as I can about what the field of neuroplasticity is talking about right now. What have they found out? Right. And even if one doesn't have a formal training in these fields, the summaries of these, of the experiments done. There's lots of, you know, pop science books and articles and podcasts. There's tons of podcasts out there by scientists who are translating their field into a more accessible format and just looking for as much information as I can. And keeping that really open mind. The, you know, the good mind of a scientist, even if you're not formally trained as a scientist, you can still have a scientist's mind. And that's where the science-based comes in for me with paganism. Mark: I really agree. And certainly in terms of my my environmental ethic. Choices about, you know, why I decided to drive an electric car, you know, these kinds of things certainly come down to science-based assessments that I've made based on what my values are around how much do I want to impact the atmosphere? How much do I, you know, want to consume energy, all those kinds of things. The other piece when talking about science-based paganism, I think both of us have articulated really well, what it means to us as individuals, but science-based paganism is also a movement. It's been on the move in recent years and there's more and more attention to it. There's more and more people participating in it which is exciting. And I need to say a little bit about why I think that's it important because I have high hopes for paganism. I think that reverence for the Earth, which brings us forth and sustains us throughout our lives and for the Sun, of course, which is the energy source, which drives all of that process. It's such a truthful form of spirituality. It's rooted in reality. And that's why it is so much more moving to me than some others, which, as far as I can tell are not so much rooted in reality. They're rooted in stories and I love stories. I love stories and I love myths and I love metaphors and, you know, symbols and imagery and all that stuff. And I use it all in my rituals. But when it comes to what I'm going to direct, my spiritual love towards. I want it to be real. I want to know that it's real. And the best tool that we have for knowing things is science. So my hope is that over time, the pagan community will become more science-based and people who don't want to be science-based, they don't have to be, you know, I'm not trying to convert anybody, but my hope is that more and more of us will become more scientifically literate and will become a movement that stands up and starts to speak with credibility. In our society about what's really important here, you know, how should we be living in relation to the natural world? How should we be living in relation to one another? Because right now that language is all about money and money besides being imaginary. Which doesn't mean it isn't real. It just means that it's something that we've collectively decided to behave as if it's real. That's an insufficient capture of value. And I want to live my life in relation to what is most of value. That at root that's really where I am with it. Did we actually run out of stuff to say on this topic? I can't believe it. Yucca: Well, choose a topic and I can run off on a tangent with it. But I think that for the story of today, far as the story of this podcast I think that this is a wonderful place to wrap up and say as always, we so appreciate all of you being here with us and taking the time out of your day to listen. And for the feedback that we get from you just for being part of this movement, this community. Mark: Yes. Yes. Very much so. The I'm always just so tickled when someone joins the Atheopagan Facebook group, for example, and says, Oh, I heard you on a podcast. Or if they leave a comment on the blog. Yes. So I was listening to this thing called the wonder and I heard about the blog. It's just, it's really heartwarming. And to know that these ideas and this direction for spirituality is, has real appeal for people. Well Yucca. Thank you so much. What a wonderful conversation I've really enjoyed today. Yeah. Yucca: Likewise. Thank you.

To MARS! THREE Mars Probes! China, NASA, and the United Arab Emerites! UAE “Hope” probe successfully reaches Mars, two more following shortly | Ars Technica Perseverance (rover) – Wikipedia Mars 2020 – Wikipedia Mars Helicopter Ingenuity – Wikipedia China’s Tianwen-1 Mars probe captures epic video of Red Planet during orbital arrival | Space Tianwen-1 – Wikipedia Emirates Mars Mission facts: UAE Hope Probe everything to know | The National (thenationalnews.com)

We’re back this month with the second installment of our side project, Voyages to Mars! Leaving Earth on your way to Mars, the first pit stop you might make is the Moon’s orbit. In this episode, we follow three Mars-bound space travelers from Mark Wicks’ novel, “To Mars via the Moon.” We see the Moon through the eyes of two Englishmen and a Scotsman as they explore the lunar surface with a combination of stretched scientific speculation and science fiction imaginings.   About Voyages to Mars: On July 30, 2020 NASA’s Perseverance rover launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida to Jezero crater, Mars. To accompany Percy on its seven-month journey, we’re compiling a literary mixtape of Martian-themed sci-fi set to music by DJ Kid Koala. Voyages to Mars is made possible by the support of the Secretary of the Smithsonian and the Smithsonian Orlando Regional Council.

This weekend we started a brand new Sermon series, "I Can't Believe It!" It was also a very special day because our VBS kids showed how much fun they had during the week at To Mars & Beyond! Watch and enjoy!

Trinity Sunday coinciding with Fathers Day and To Mars and Beyond, VBS Kick-off created a challenge for pastor Krogh. Call all this fit in one sermon that ends before supper?

With the 50th anniversary of humans landing on the moon during the NASA Apollo missions, where does humanity go next? Back to the moon? To Mars? Should we risk sending humans to space or let the robots handle it? These are a few of the issues we tackle in our conversation with Dr. Leslie Wickman. Dr. Wickman heads up the Christian faith/science group the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) and is also a research scientist, engineering consultant, author, speaker and athlete. She was an engineer for Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, where she worked on NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and International Space Station Programs, receiving commendations from NASA for her contributions and being designated as Lockheed's Corporate Astronaut and earned the nickname "Rocket Girl.” Dr. Wickman is a Professor of Aerospace-Industrial-Mechanical Engineering at California Baptist University and is also continues to teach at Azusa Pacific University. Check out ASA: https://www.asa3.org/ Dr. Wickman’s website: http://www.leslieannwickman.com/ Her book, “God of the Big Bang: How Modern Science Affirms the Creator:” https://www.amazon.com/God-Big-Bang-Science-Affirms/dp/161795425X California Baptist University’s College of Engineering: https://calbaptist.edu/college-of-engineering/ Azusa Pacific University Department of Engineering and Computer Science: https://www.apu.edu/clas/computerscience/ Join the full podcast interview for our full conversation: https://www.purposenation.org/podcast/ Full interview transcript: https://www.purposenation.org/leslie-wickman-phd-podcast-interview-transcript/ Please subscribe to our YouTube Channel and to our podcast on iTunes, Google Play, SoundCloud or your favorite podcasting application: https://www.purposenation.org/podcast/ Visit our website for more information or to make a tax-deductible donation to our non-profit 501(c)(3) Christian ministry: www.purposenation.org/

In this episode, we had a lot of time on our hand after being marooned on another planet, so we watched the 2015 science fiction/comedy The Martian. How dangerous are plutonium fueled Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators? Does cosmic radiation doom Matt Damon life on Mars? Why does every Mars movie need an impossible sandstorm? Tim and special guest host Gabe answer these questions and more. We also hear from Chris Mariasola who breaks down the maritime/space law in the movie for us. This is the fourth in our Mini-Nuke episode series, where we find movies that do not have enough nuclear nonsense for a full-sized episode but nonetheless demand over thinking. Before we fulfill our Iron Man fantasies, we recommend checking out: - Timothy Jorgensen, Strange Glow: The Story of Radiation (Princeton Press, 2016) -the documentary “To Mars by A-Bomb: The Secret History of Project Orion,” BBC, 2003, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYoLcJuBtOw -George Dyson, Project Orion: The True Story of the Atomic Spaceship (Henry Holt and Co, 2002) -Marshall Savage, The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps (Little, Brown and Company, 1992) Also check out the sources below to learn more (you can also access these links on our SoundCloud and Facebook pages): -Chris Marisola, Lawfareblog.com, https://lawfareblog.com/contributors/cmirasola -Rhett Allain, “The Science in The Martian Isn’t Perfect, but That’s Okay,” Wired, September 23, 2015, https://www.wired.com/2015/09/science-martian-isnt-perfect-thats-ok/ -Rhett Allain, “How That Spinning Spacecraft From The Martian Would Work,” Wired, August 25, 2015, https://www.wired.com/2015/08/spinning-spacecraft-martian-work/ - Sarah Fecht, “Realism Makes ‘The Martian’ One of the Greatest Sci-Fi Films of All Time,” Popular Science, September 30, 2015, http://www.popsci.com/realism-makes-martian-one-greatest-sci-fi-films-all-time -“ Sandstorms, Explosions, Potatoes, Oh My: 'Martian' Takes Its Science Seriously,” NPR, September 27, 2015, http://www.npr.org/2015/09/27/443192327/sandstorms-explosions-potatoes-oh-my-martian-takes-its-science-seriously -Rod Adams, “‘The Martian’s’ RTG Science Includes Jarring Errors,” Atomic Insights, July 6, 2013, http://atomicinsights.com/martians-rtg-science-errors/ -Ron Turner, “The Radiation Threat to ‘The Martian,’” ANSER, 2015, http://www.anser.org/docs/The_Radiation_Threat_to_the_Martian.pdf -Terry Dunn, “Dissecting the Technology of 'The Martian': Electrical Power,” Tested.com, September 9, 2015, http://www.tested.com/science/540836-dissecting-technology-martian-electrical-power/ -“The Science Behind 'The Martian' - Staying Warm on Mars,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPwhMUfbuh0 -Gary L. Bennett, “Review: The Martian,” Federation of Scientists, 2015, https://fas.org/nuke/space/martian.pdf -Dave Mosher, “NASA’s Plutonium Problem Could End Deep-Space Exploration,” Wired, September 19, 2013, https://www.wired.com/2013/09/plutonium-238-problem/ -Project Orion, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion) -Steve Spaleta, “Project Orion Nuclear Propulsion – 1950s Tests (video), Space.com, December 14, 2014, http://www.space.com/28009-project-orion-nuclear-propulsion-1950s-tests-unclassified-video.html We aim to have at least one new episode every month. Let us know what you think about the podcast and any ideas you may have about future episodes and guests by reaching out at on Twitter @NuclearPodcast, GooglePlay, SoundCloud, TuneIn, Stitcher Radio, Facebook, SuperCriticalPodcast@gmail.com, and YouTube. Enjoy!

Scott Beale, founder of Laughing Squid joins us to talk about the Web 2.0 days in San Francisco, the scene in NYC, SXSW, Burning Man, The Cacophony Society and much much more. Subscribe to the Grumpy Old Geeks on iTunes and give us a five star rating. You know you want to! Shownotes: Scott Beale In search of the click track Revisiting the click track Hat-tip to David Teter Prince on Twitter Moves GPGTools Zip Drives SyQuest Macintosh Quadra 650 The Random Show Everyday Carry Kershaw Ken Onion knife This Charming Charlie Mammoth Garfield minus Garfield It's A Bad Brains Christmas, Charlie Brown Laughing Squid the blog Laughing Squid Hosting Technorati Top 100 When the Blogger Blogs, Can the Employer Intervene? The beginnings of BarCamp Technorati Users Salon by Scott Beale (Jason is getting a smooch in the last photo) Live Diggnation by Jason DeFillippo Distort betaworks NetNewsWire Burning Man South by Southwest The Cacophony Society Tales of the San Francisco Cacophony Society Book Soylent The Drab stupidity of Soylent by Greg Stevens. Crowdfunding a trip. To Mars. Like you do.

Episode 134 are belong to us! This week, we get another heaping ton of listener feedback, and take you on a scientific journey through meat production, space travel, and sitcom war. This week: • Listener Feedback (6:23) • 3D “Printed” Meat & Leather (23:13) • To Mars! (34:00) • World Domination Trivia! (43:13) • Franchise Kombat (46:05) • The WTF Files (58:24) • Facebook Feedback Wrap-up (1:04:13) • Bald Move Kindle Fire Giveaway Deets (1:10:17) • Recommendations (1:11:52) And don’t forget to enter the Bald Move Kindle Fire Contest! You can win a Kindle fire by simply tweeting or facebook a link to BaldMove.com! Get all the info at BaldMove.com/Contest Listen up! And feed us back (we’ll put it on the cast) Send us an email Tweet our twitter Face our Book Or give us a call and leave us a voicemail at 360-362-0024 (and we’ll play it on the cast) Thanks for listening!