Author Topic: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer  (Read 5508 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline josecamoessilva

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • Country: us
Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« on: February 19, 2017, 07:01:20 pm »
Via Thunderf00t's twitter, I saw a ridiculous article on Popular Science: "a machine that pulls water from thin air. literally." Yes, no capitalization on that title. Because they're special.

My response in graphic form:



I used to think "ok, it's their ignorance and their readers' " but in this case, any investment into this product is being diverted from projects that might actually work, in other words, this product is literally making it so that more people die and Popular Science is hyping it up.

Gahhhh!
 
The following users thanked this post: EEVblog, edavid, Kean

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31218
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2017, 11:13:40 pm »
How embarrassing!  :palm:
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31218
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2017, 11:18:44 pm »
This is the person responsible for the article, the assistant editor
http://www.sarahfecht.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarah-fecht-a729ab1a/

Not exactly under-qualified, you'd think sh'ed know better.
 

Offline MagicSmoker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1418
  • Country: us
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2017, 11:34:23 pm »
I just wanted to say that the Corgi was a most satisfying salve for the otherwise painful arithmetic.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31218
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2017, 11:40:25 pm »
I've called her out on twitter, lets she if she responds.
 

Offline StillTrying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2501
  • Country: dk
  • Country: Broken Britain
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2017, 12:31:37 am »
I found it hard to find on twitter not knowing it's  @PopSci

If you want to dissipate heat into cold ground, a minimum surface area bulb is the worst shape!
CML+  That took much longer than I thought it would.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31218
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2017, 11:22:35 am »
Does anyone have a full scan of this article?
 

Offline josecamoessilva

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 64
  • Country: us
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2017, 04:34:19 am »
I've called her out on twitter, lets she if she responds.

In my experience, science popularizers who aren't active research scientists, especially those who mostly work within traditional media, don't lower themselves to arguing with people on the interwebs who happen to know better than the popularizer what they're calling her on. But, like the man from Nantes said, we'll see.  8)

Cheers,
JCS
 

Offline Phili76

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 10
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #8 on: February 21, 2017, 10:24:52 am »
when the fan blows the air down the pipe where should it go then? Magically escape in the soil? ???
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31218
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2017, 10:41:23 am »
I've called her out on twitter, lets she if she responds.

In my experience, science popularizers who aren't active research scientists, especially those who mostly work within traditional media, don't lower themselves to arguing with people on the interwebs who happen to know better than the popularizer what they're calling her on. But, like the man from Nantes said, we'll see.  8)

Well, she hasn't replied to email or twitter. Meh, I'll be doing my video on this tomorrow anyway  ;D
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w, Kean

Offline Rutherfordium

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 19
  • Country: ca
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2017, 03:02:34 am »
Sad to see Popular Science make this mistake.  Has anyone else noticed even Scientific American becoming fluff these days?  I feel like there's a real lack of truly compelling science journalism.  More and more it seems like the top comment on reddit is the best source of information on breaking stories, which is really sad.
 

Online Bud

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4037
  • Country: ca
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2017, 05:17:14 pm »
It is hard to take seriously anything that has "pop" in it, be it pop culture, pop science, pop corn , or Pope.
Facebook-free life and Rigol-free shack.
 

Offline donotdespisethesnake

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1088
  • Country: gb
  • Embedded stuff
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #12 on: February 27, 2017, 04:26:02 pm »
Wow, just wow! Amazing how much money you can raise just based on bullshit! Imagine how much it would raise if it actually worked...

This is somewhat similar to the Steorn "Orbo" debacle. That zombie took 10 years and €20 million before finally being nailed into it's coffin. I really hope this gets killed sooner.

It's also very sad to see reputable names associated with it, and not telling people it is bullshit, but I guess no one wants to defend a lawsuit. I can understand UC Berkeley not being concerned, universities are basically like commercial operations nowadays. OTOH, the National Peace Corps Association is collaborating with this scam, when donations could go to genuinely good causes.

As for those at ViCi Labs...
Bob
"All you said is just a bunch of opinions."
 

Offline technogeeky

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 545
  • Country: us
  • Older New "New Player" Player Playa'
Re: Popular Science shills for WaterSeer
« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2017, 08:31:52 am »
I think it's safe to say that Sarah Fecht this one up.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf