# Space 1999 - bad science? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 26, 2009, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209 "2009-10-26T19:20:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/61 "2009-10-28T00:19:08Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Cite? With all the discussion this comment evoked, I think we’re going to need someone to do a bit of experimentation. Please take video. > I was _five_ when the show came out, and man did it scare the crap out of me. Wasn’t there some episode with the ? monster ? that sucked people into it. It had one big eye. I think it spit them out in cardboard boxes or something like that (beats me what my five-year-old imagination interpreted them as). Yeah, a lot of the science escaped me at the time, I’m not sure I want to go back and re-watch. > > I think I’ll just wait for the results of the experiment. As long as spoiler boxes abound…keep in mind your inner 5 year old might freak, you were warned… The monster digested them with a strong acid, and spit out their mostly dissolved husks. It wigged this former 15 year old out something awful. IIRC the monster wasn’t “fully” in this universe, not 100% in phase, or whatever… ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/62 "2009-10-28T00:58:27Z")
> [@](#): > > But yes, if the explosion is on the far side of the moon, the moon would move closer to Earth. It appeared to me to be just over the horizon, not on the far side of the moon. It might have been more accurate to have the moon base survive on a chunk of the moon, hurtling through space. But then the viewers might lose identity & connection with the moon and not care as much for the cast-aways. Everything done in the name of better ratings is probably going to be bad science. Sure, the explosion premise was bad science. If you’ve got a better way to throw the moon out into deep space, I’d sure like to hear it. You can’t be willing to accept the premise that the moon will be thrown out into deep space, and then reject it on the grounds that they didn’t do it properly. > [@](#): > > Space 1999 is worth it IMO if for no other reason than it has a different “feel” to it than most other space stuff . Stark. Depressing. Sterile. Its the Das Boot of space exploration. > [@](#): > > But the plots were interesting and music was superb, as well as the special effects and the acting competent. The deserted hulking alien space ships all had that “haunted house in space” look and feel. The space art was great. The [weapons](http://www.tnthobbies.co.uk/Space1999StunGun.jpg) very non-stereotypical (not “gun-shaped”). The [ships](http://www.space1999.net/catacombs/plus/dt/day/imaltares.jpg) looked minimalistic and institutional, like something we might actually build. The aliens were usually pretty good, and often quite creepy. They very often succeeded in stirring the xenophobia that I didn’t even know I had. Contrasted to most of the Star Trek franchise where they got so tired of coming up with new aliens that it started looking like a parade of humans each fitted with a slightly different forehead prosthesis. Sometimes it wasn’t even that - just a bumpy nose bridge or an unusual hairstyle was employed to make somebody look like an alien. Space: 1999 was great for all of the above quoted reasons. This is one series that needs a revival. Space: 2099! ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/63 "2009-10-28T01:05:52Z")
Wait, how is this thread not in cafe society? Talk about being off course. > [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Wasn’t there some episode with the ? monster ? that sucked people into it. It had one big eye. I think it spit them out in cardboard boxes or something like that (beats me what my five-year-old imagination interpreted them as). [Dragon’s Domain](http://www.space1999.net/catacombs/main/epguide/t23dd.html). Creepiness factor: 9.3 ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/64 "2009-10-28T01:22:53Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > OK… Thank you! I must’ve missed that one. I only vaguely remember one or two _Space: 1999_ episodes. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/65 "2009-10-28T01:26:57Z")
Moved to CS. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/66 "2009-10-28T01:32:22Z")
The other thing I loved was how they depicted the starry background. In Star Trek’s various iterations, it always looked like a black velvet curtain with pinholes poked thru (which it was in some cases I believe). In S1999 space looked vast, as it should have; nebulas and other background objects added depth. Given the crude FX of the time I found that rather impressive. Probably my favorite episode is the one where the moon has to “touch” a planet to cause it to phase into a new dimension or somesuch-Koenig seemingly goes crazy and tries to convince everyone else that, no, there won’t be a moon-shattering collision (tho as mentioned upthread tidal forces would have done the deed before that happened). An alien woman visits him (only Koenig can see her) and gets him to okay to her plan. ---
**Author:** ![MacSpon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/34f0e0/32.png) [@MacSpon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MacSpon)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/67 "2009-10-28T08:12:54Z")
I always found it interesting to compare the series to the book “Space: 1999 - Earthfall” by E C Tubb. The first half of it was a novelisation of the pilot episode. The big difference was that Tubb knew something about science, so he put a lot of work into making it a bit more credible. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/68 "2009-10-28T17:00:36Z")
Icerigger and DrFidelius, you missed the twist ending:[spoiler]When the aliens said they had room to take one passenger back the Earth, the Alpha crew set their computer to figure out who would be the best person to return to Earth. The Commissioner was a dickhead and decided he was going to hijack the ship instead in order to get back himself. As Icerigger wrote, the hijack caused the suspended animation unit to not work right and the Commissioner woke up only a few minutes into the trip. He called back begging for rescue which was impossible. Then the twist ending. Somebody asked Commander Koenig who the computer had picked as the passenger who should have gone back. Koenig said the computer had picked the Commissioner.[/spoiler] ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/69 "2009-10-28T17:24:13Z")
You are correct sir. One funny thing about Dragon’s Domain, the episode is told in a series of flashbacks as Dr Russell is making up a report on the history of the case. She is composing her paper on a typewriter a manual typewriter.😉 ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/70 "2009-10-28T17:25:58Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > Sure, the explosion premise was bad science. If you’ve got a better way to throw the moon out into deep space, I’d sure like to hear it. You can’t be willing to accept the premise that the moon will be thrown out into deep space, and then reject it on the grounds that they didn’t do it properly. It took me 3 seconds to come up with a better way to toss the moon into deep space: a black hole or neutron star or even an earth-sized planet transits the solar system at high speed. It passes near the moon, the gravity of the body alters the moon’s orbit from eliptical to hyperbolic, and there you go. ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/71 "2009-10-28T17:27:55Z")
> [@](#): > > She is composing her paper on a typewriter a manual typewriter. And the Alpha computer spits out calculations on adding machine tape 😃 I just don’t know how they couldn’t have seen that being an antique output process even in the 70’s. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/72 "2009-10-28T18:32:09Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > And the Alpha computer spits out calculations on adding machine tape 😃 > > I just don’t know how they couldn’t have seen that being an antique output process even in the 70’s. Do you really need reams of 8 by 10 paper and a power point presentation for a handfull of numbers ? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/73 "2009-10-28T19:42:11Z")
> [@MacSpon](#): > > I always found it interesting to compare the series to the book “Space: 1999 - Earthfall” by E C Tubb. The first half of it was a novelisation of the pilot episode. The big difference was that Tubb knew something about science, so he put a lot of work into making it a bit more credible. 🙂 Hmm, I’ve never seen that one. Did it come out in England? And, do you remember how he did it? In Asimov’s novelization of Fantastic Voyage he put in a line or two about the extra mass going into hyperspace, but that was a much easer clean up job than Tubb had. ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2009, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/74 "2009-10-29T21:57:32Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > All these posts and no one has brought up the 1/6th gravity issue? On Moonbase itself? That once you go outside you walk all floaty and then back inside you’re walking as if on Earth? I think I raised that in the “dumb moments in science fiction” thread (if I remember the thread title properly). The show never really seemed to be about the science, more about metaphysics in the first season. Then the second series was all about karate chops and big monsters and it really went down hill. The music, models and that doctor who came across as permanently stoned were the pulls of the show 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2009, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/75 "2009-10-29T22:20:04Z")
> [@Pushkin](#): > > On Moonbase itself? That once you go outside you walk all floaty and then back inside you’re walking as if on Earth? I think I raised that in the “dumb moments in science fiction” thread (if I remember the thread title properly). Come on now. YOU come up with a way to simulate 1/6 gravity dirt cheap on a production set then you’ll have a point. Normal gravity is the biggest and most common concession ever in nearly every sci-fi space travel show other than possibly nearly everybody everywhere speaks english…for good reason. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2009, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/76 "2009-10-29T22:43:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Come on now. > > YOU come up with a way to simulate 1/6 gravity dirt cheap on a production set then you’ll have a point. Sure, you just play back the film at 40.6% speed. Simulating _zero_ gravity is tough, but _low_ gravity is no problem. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2009, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/77 "2009-10-29T22:46:57Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Sure, you just play back the film at 40.6% speed. Simulating _zero_ gravity is tough, but _low_ gravity is no problem. We couldnt do it as a nation in the 60’s, so how could a tv studio do it ? 🙂 Besides, wouldnt the actors sound like Borris Carloff…or maybe Mickey Mouse ? I get confused… ---
**Author:** ![Kylede](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a6a055/32.png) [@Kylede](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kylede)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2009, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/78 "2009-10-30T06:27:25Z")
> [@Harmonious\_Discord](#): > > The whole show was full of bad science, but most wasn’t really science as much as the perceived science of an imaginative hippie on drugs. I liked the show, but nothing in the science presented should be taken seriously. It’s about as scientifically accurate as the show Land of the Lost. Some of he science on _Land of the Lost_was not bad at all…and way ahead of the morons who ultimately dumbed down the show after the first season. Hell, the had a linguist create a Bronze age language for the Pakuni. Please do NOT equate _Space:1999_ with _Land of the Lost_ ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2009, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/79 "2009-10-30T07:30:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Besides, wouldnt the actors sound like Borris Carloff…or maybe Mickey Mouse ? I get confused… OK, point. But that just means that you can’t have them talking and walking around at the same time. I can think of a number of tricks to avoid that-- Shot 1, two people walking away from the camera down a corridor while talking. Slow the video down, and dub the voices in separately (which is OK since we can’t see their faces). Shot 2, close-up on the faces, from the other end of the hallway, as they continue the conversation. We can see their faces now, so we have to run the film at normal speed, but we can’t see most of their bodies moving, so the slo-mo isn’t necessary. And so on. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2009, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209/80 "2009-10-30T20:42:48Z")
> [@John\_DiFool](#): > > As long as spoiler boxes abound…keep in mind your inner 5 year old might freak, you were warned… > > The monster digested them with a strong acid, and spit out their mostly dissolved husks. It wigged this former 15 year old out something awful. IIRC the monster wasn’t “fully” in this universe, not 100% in phase, or whatever… > [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > Wait, how is this thread not in cafe society? Talk about being off course. > > [Dragon’s Domain](http://www.space1999.net/catacombs/main/epguide/t23dd.html). Creepiness factor: 9.3 [Eeeepppppeeeeeeppp aiiiieeeeeeeee yayayayayayayayayayayayayaya](http://www.space1999.net/catacombs/main/epimg/tidd10.html)!!! {whimper} [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/space-1999-bad-science/515209.md?page=5)