intentionally misleading advertising!

nit _ _ _ .




Jon wrote:

"Mark Rather" dug deep for this:
Few care here. Take it to an astrology group.....

Bad day, Mark? Nobody really cares, but you're stinking up the thread.

"francis marion" wrote in message news:gAvUc.32705$TI1.9603@attbi_s52...
Did the ad actually say that you would see these things? If they didn't,
it's not false advertising.

They are only stating an opinion about these objects, you are free to draw
your own conclusions about
their opinions.

If you think about it..... The Universe is Vast, Captivating (to some of us)
and dynamic.

Galaxies and nebulae are distant, constantly changing and evolving.



So how long have you worked on Madison Ave?
-Rich

(Jon Isaacs) wrote in message ...

(Brian Tung) wrote in message ...

Many people credit themselves with knowing little about math and science.

Whether or not they're truly proud of their own ignorance, outwardly
they flaunt it, perhaps in an attempt to save face or justify
intellectual laziness. I guess the idea is that if they don't care
about something, then it's meaningless. I'm sure I've done the same
thing with subjects I don't care about, such as modern popular music,
but I think that math and science should be in a different class
altogether, much like literacy. Unfortunately, even the latter is in
the process of being relegated to the status of just another optional
skill or special interest (for nerds). This is likely the result of
complacency--living has simply become too easy for too many people.

Thus their inability to use the telescope is not a cause for blame. They
have simply confirmed their status as non-nerds, and the telescope goes
into the closet.

Perhaps I'm giving people too much credit, but some of them might
actually be embarrassed by their lack of immediate success. Those who
have little real confidence in their abilities often resort to
procrastination, of which throwing a new telescope in the closet could
be one form.

I'm reminded of an educational experiment that was conducted on two
groups of elementary school children a few years ago. One group was
coddled and made to feel really great about themselves when they
accomplished the most trivial of tasks, while the other was given
constructive criticism and encouragement to do better. When presented
with more difficult tasks later on, unsurprisingly the children in the
second group were much more willing to put forth the effort to learn,
while the children in the first group were more easily frustrated, and
often demanded to be shown the solution or to be given a simpler
task--they lacked real confidence and needed another self-esteem fix.
I wonder how these traits and their contributing factors are
distributed demographically.

Another theory I'd mentioned in another thread is that many telescopes
are purchased for children so that they could magically turn into
astrophysicists all by themselves. This might work for a few
children, but in the vast majority of these cases, the scopes end up
in the closet to wait for the next garage or estate sale.

Recently a lady was advertising for a "beginners telescope" on a local forsale
list. I responded with some suggestions, not having anything to pass on at the
moment.

Of course I advised against Department store scopes.

She replied she had been that route and had returned the scope to the store
because it was unsatisfactory.

So, some folks trust themselves, I'll bet there's a fairly high return rate on
DSTs.

I'm sure that there are many returned DSTs, but if we're to believe
the idea that this is where most of the profit is made in the
telescope business, then the return rate couldn't be too substantial.


- Robert Cook