The difference between global climate and hemispherical weathercycles

There is a tendency to think of astronomy in terms of amateur and
professional or to be more precise,to think of it as a hobby as
opposed to a working career based on magnification equipment and an
exercise at night,it has less to do with raw talent as it has to do
with a career choice and the merit system,dysfunctional as it is,
reflects this current view.The rewards are only for conformity and
those who make up the numbers for whatever particular bandwagon is in
vogue and even the old empiricists have remarked on this difference
between science and vocation which has changed over their lifetimes -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

I practice astronomy as an avocation,doing what I need to do in an era
which has no merit system yet I do not complain and look forward to a
time when people return to their senses and start working off
interpretation and applying speculation only when needed thereby
allowing modifications and adaptations which are an integral part of
astronomy.

Is it so much to ask that professional career astronomers accept that
the Ra/Dec framework is a genuine observational convenience for
predicting events within the 365/366 day calendar system thereby
relieving the conceptual gridlock which currently is preventing
productive work from being done in areas where planetary dynamics and
terrestrial effect mesh and particularly the huge modification to
bring the difference between climate and weather in line with modern
imaging power.

On Apr 3, 5:26*am, oriel36 wrote:

Is it so much to ask that professional career astronomers accept that
the Ra/Dec framework is a genuine observational convenience for
predicting events within the 365/366 day calendar system thereby
relieving the conceptual gridlock

Well, yes, it is too much to ask.

Because professional career astronomers aren't _noticing_ any
"conceptual gridlock". Newtonian empiricism, framehopping, and
imaginary observers seem to be working just fine for them, and,
indeed, these things form the basis *for* work which they perceive as
highly productive.

If someone like you comes out of left field to tell them that, no,
they're doing it all wrong, and _especially_ if you try to extol the
virtues of *intuition* (guided by "authority", yet!) in preference to
mathematics... no, they won't listen.

If you had something which you could explain in language they
understand, and point to as what they would gain, it might be
different.

Failing that, it seems like you simply want to set astronomy back 400
years for no good reason.

John Savard

oriel36 wrote:

There is a tendency to think of astronomy in terms of amateur and
professional or to be more precise,to think of it as a hobby as
opposed to a working career based on magnification equipment and an
exercise at night,it has less to do with raw talent as it has to do
with a career choice and the merit system,dysfunctional as it is,
reflects this current view.

Huh? Some people think of astronomy as the egg on top of the turtle on top

of a Big Mac. So take your thorizine and find a friend ... eggplant maybe?





The rewards are only for conformity and
those who make up the numbers for whatever particular bandwagon is in
vogue and even the old empiricists have remarked on this difference
between science and vocation which has changed over their lifetimes -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

I practice astronomy as an avocation,doing what I need to do in an era
which has no merit system yet I do not complain and look forward to a
time when people return to their senses and start working off
interpretation and applying speculation only when needed thereby
allowing modifications and adaptations which are an integral part of
astronomy.

Is it so much to ask that professional career astronomers accept that
the Ra/Dec framework is a genuine observational convenience for
predicting events within the 365/366 day calendar system thereby
relieving the conceptual gridlock which currently is preventing
productive work from being done in areas where planetary dynamics and
terrestrial effect mesh and particularly the huge modification to
bring the difference between climate and weather in line with modern
imaging power.

In article , jwarner1 says...



oriel36 wrote:

There is a tendency to think of astronomy in terms of amateur and
professional or to be more precise,to think of it as a hobby as
opposed to a working career based on magnification equipment and an
exercise at night,it has less to do with raw talent as it has to do
with a career choice and the merit system,dysfunctional as it is,
reflects this current view.

Huh? Some people think of astronomy as the egg on top of the turtle on top

of a Big Mac. So take your thorizine and find a friend ... eggplant maybe?


Dry up pimple brain.

On Apr 3, 4:26*am, oriel36 wrote:

I practice astronomy as an avocation...

.... as do most of us here, and it is great fun.

The problem, in your case, is that your astronomical foundation is
woefully weak, for you do not appear to understand the very basic
concepts of this hobby. You place way too much confidence in your
"intuitive intelligence" and your interpretation of pretty pictures,
and way too little confidence in the massive work done by others over
the last 400 years. Just because you can't understand what they are
trying to teach you doesn't mean they are wrong.

It is simply not the case that you are correct in your speculations
and that the rest of the community is wrong. That is plainly
delusional.

The only gridlock here is squarely between your ears.

“There are some people who live in a dream world, and there are some
who face reality; and then there are those who turn one into the
other.”
- Douglas H. Everett

\Paul the Nuisance