View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 14th 19, 11:32 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
corvastro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default One astronomer who shouldn't drop the soap

On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 4:19:40 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 12:49:11 PM UTC-5, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
On Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 3:19:37 PM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 3:02:32 AM UTC-5, RichA wrote:
https://gizmodo.com/telescope-hobbyi...tta-1830875259

He should have come on over to sci.astro.amateur, where nobody ever gets banned.


Number one, he wasn't an astronomer but a telescope hobbyist and number two - people here don't get banned but they do get bullied which is more like the genuine workings of a society. You can't survive in this forum if you are weak so although there are plenty of best-boys-in-the-class type contributors, more work gets done here than in all the institutions on Earth put together where cause and effect or structural interpretation is involved..

Every now and again the insights make it into wider circulation in a half-assed but the hard work was done here in this unmoderated forum where people maintain their own discipline instead of being forced by 'moderators'.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-tru...t-human-lives/

https://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data...current_c3.gif

Most here are empirical clones or drones so they are immune to productive and creative work while all those who think they are astronomers because they own telescope equipment are like people who own a guitar and think they are
composers.


When I was a kid, I had a guitar and made up new lyrics to popular songs. Most of us probably did that. So we are composers, even if we never made any money at it.


That wouldn't make you a composer, but a lyricist. Like Hammerstein or Lerner.
The respective composers were Rodgers and Loewe.