The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

3 February 2003

Well, no wonder

CNN screen shot

If I were going that fast, I bet I'd break up too.

Note to CNN: NASA has yet to demonstrate anything close to warp 1, let alone 2.6.

Posted at 7:26 AM to Say What?

TrackBack: 12:40 PM, 3 February 2003
» A career change? from American RealPolitik
Cecil Adams of gives you the heads up on how to become a UN Weapons Inspector. Just for kicks, check out this great CNN screenshot dustbury has....[read more]

TrackBack: 1:01 PM, 3 February 2003
» Well, this certainly explains a lot.... from The People's Republic of Seabrook
...[read more]

TrackBack: 7:49 AM, 4 February 2003
» CNN says Shuttle was Traveling 18 Times the Speed of Light from Suckahs Daily Bookmarks
CNN says Shuttle was Traveling 18 Times the Speed of Light...[read more]

TrackBack: 8:51 AM, 6 February 2003
» Columbia Shuttle Traveling 18 Times Speed of Light? from OutofRange
Some mistake surely....[read more]

Wow. Twelve billion miles per hour, huh. If I were going that fast, I might get through and grade my last set of 8th grade compositions.


Posted by: vickie at 9:46 AM on 3 February 2003

The Fox guy that moring several times reported an altitude of 207 feet. Making the roar heard by many entirely plausible.

Posted by: Chuck at 11:39 AM on 3 February 2003

Well, I was going to gloat about CNN until I read Chuck's comment. But I'll bet I know who the guy on Fox was that was making that mistake.

Posted by: Kevin McGehee at 4:16 PM on 3 February 2003

CNN also mispelled Mach. Seeing "Moch 18" scroll by almost made me laugh.

Posted by: john little at 6:41 PM on 3 February 2003

Cap'n, I dinna ken she can take it enna more! She's already at warp 9!

As on-air flubs go, this was pretty substantial. And I really got tired of hearing "200,000 feet up," when they could have simply said 39 (or 40, or whatever) miles...doesn't that give viewers a much better scale to gauge the distance?

Posted by: DavidMSC at 7:25 PM on 3 February 2003

You have to remember, they are reporters. They can only repeat what they've been told. Even worse is when they mis-repeat what they've been told.

Posted by: Steve at 10:29 PM on 3 February 2003

Great catch, Mr. Hill. It's amazing how many errors CNN and, alas, Fox News make on those news tickers. Seems like one-in-five is incorrect, awkwardly worded or amusingly opaque.

Posted by: Oscar Jr. at 11:36 PM on 3 February 2003

Perhaps this is why more people tune into CNN during the breaking news. (for the laughs)

Posted by: Ravenwood at 11:51 PM on 3 February 2003

I heard that guy on Fox say that several times too. "Over 207 feet above the earth!" He really seemed to think that was impressive.

I was wondering why the spectators who heard the boom weren't incinerated.

Posted by: Dean Esmay at 12:50 AM on 4 February 2003

This item was pretty funny too.

Posted by: Ara Rubyan at 7:12 AM on 4 February 2003

It's a daunting task fact-checking the asses of the reporters (so much material, so little time); trying to keep track of the minimum-wage drones who pound away on the Chyrons to produce the screen crawls and such is beyond even the strongest of us. (Well, maybe Susanna Cornett can pull it off.)

Posted by: CGHill at 9:36 AM on 4 February 2003

Even better to this native Texan was all the reporters trying to pronounce the town of Nacogdoches. One (on Fox, I think) had it right until someone off camera "corrected" her! Glad it wasn't Waxahachie!!!

Posted by: Mitch at 11:52 AM on 4 February 2003

God forbid they should find something at, say, Natchitoches, Louisiana. (Which is only three syllables, none of them intuitive.)

Posted by: CGHill at 12:20 PM on 4 February 2003

Why? It's just French for Nacogdoches, isn't it?

I wonder what the English version would be?


Posted by: Kevin McGehee at 3:07 PM on 4 February 2003

Wow! Travelling at 18.0c! It's times like these when i [almost] wish I hadn't given up TV.

Does anybody know if any announcer said that? Even if they didn't, who the devil are they using for caption-writers? Almost any 12-year-old would have caught that blooper. I suppose they really meant "speed of sound", but even that's no help - the speed of sound depends on the altitude. Go high enough and it slows to zero, except in "Star Wars" movies.

12,500 miles per hour would have been more than adequate.

Posted by: Mike at 3:10 PM on 4 February 2003

Wonder if the reporter makes bubbly-roar-zoom-zoom noises when he flies his paper airplanes around the newsroom? Zoom!

Posted by: inkgrrl at 5:53 PM on 4 February 2003

And here I was, just today, bitching that we didn't have FTL (faster than light) drives yet. Hmph. I must be way out of the loop. Do we have anti-gravity devices, too?

Posted by: Alexandra at 9:34 PM on 4 February 2003

I have been known to utter "Zoom Zoom" out on the highway, but I drive a Mazda, so it's practically de rigueur.

There will eventually be smaller, more affordable applications for antigrav devices; I think they'll wind up replacing underwire.

Posted by: CGHill at 9:48 PM on 4 February 2003

I can almost link this to science fiction!
Columbia: Beam me down houston.
(pico, pico seconds before landing)

Posted by: ashar at 5:06 AM on 6 February 2003

They wouldnt have had the time to complete saying even that

Posted by: ashar at 5:10 AM on 6 February 2003

Adding to the errors, I heard someone on Fox as referring to the Space Shuttle being at an altitude of 200,000 miles.

I thought we had given up on moon shots!

Posted by: jb at 12:18 PM on 6 February 2003

this is all interesting i just found this site will be back to visit that cnn report was a haha
thanks for the laugh of the day

Posted by: sinner at 9:33 AM on 7 February 2003

going at 18 times the speed of light is a bunch of crap, they wouldnt have even seen anything and wouldnt have noticed. it was a buch of S**T!!

Posted by: Cloud at 3:37 AM on 2 May 2003