A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » UK Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

To address my critics



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 21st 03, 07:20 PM
Greg Dortmond
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default To address my critics

Hello Amateur Astronomers,

In my most recent post regarding the seemingly intense growth in
electronic knick-knacks at the expense and demise of observational
astronomy, might I take this opportunity to address those who
seemingly have misinterpreted my claims.

One astronomer acerts he has been down the pencil sketching route and
over the years has diversed into CCD astrophotography. I take my hat
off to this gentleman who like myself served no doubt many years
apprenticeship, honing his observational skills.

My criticisms are more aimed at those who spend £3000 on a telescope
today, £1000 on a CCD camera tomorrow, publish a picture of the Great
Orion Nebula and call themselves expert astronomers.

Firstly why publish yet another blurred picture?

I can observe this much better first hand without requiring any
electronic equipement?

Indeed why bother at all? What do you hope togain of benefit in
publishing pictures like this ad nauseum?

Our libraries abound with books depicting better pictures of this
nebula than can ever be taken using an amateur CCD.

I would befit newcomers much more to learn how to properly use a
telescope, and ones eyes before entering into this branch of our
science.

Where are all the observation logs from these great astronomers?
Probably they don't exist, better to take one picture, publish it on
the internet, call ourselves astronomers and pack up for another year,
having gotten out name into the so called Amateur Astronomers Hall of
Fame.

Over the past months I have seen no observations worth
reading.....sorry but the art is definately dead...replaced by Mr
Bloggs with his £3000 telescope with which to impress his next door
neighbours...pathetic really!!!

Greg Dortmond
  #2  
Old December 21st 03, 07:42 PM
Pete Lawrence
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 21 Dec 2003 10:20:03 -0800, (Greg
Dortmond) wrote:

I'll assume you're not trolling. I maybe wrong but you do have some
substance in your posts...

My criticisms are more aimed at those who spend £3000 on a telescope
today, £1000 on a CCD camera tomorrow, publish a picture of the Great
Orion Nebula and call themselves expert astronomers.

Firstly why publish yet another blurred picture?


Why not? It provides yet another benchmark for people looking to get
into the hobby and what to know what their equipment is capable of.
If these images didn't exist on the net then I for one would have been
very happy with my blurred image of Mars earlier this year. Seeing
other people's image made me go back and review my techniques, pushing
my equipment's limits further and further.

I can observe this much better first hand without requiring any
electronic equipement?


Can you record better first hand without electonic equipment?

Indeed why bother at all? What do you hope togain of benefit in
publishing pictures like this ad nauseum?


Refinement of technique. Pride in being able to capture the images
that only large professional observatories were able to capture a few
years ago.

Our libraries abound with books depicting better pictures of this
nebula than can ever be taken using an amateur CCD.


Let's all give up then, get a book of Hubble images and never look to
the skies again.

I would befit newcomers much more to learn how to properly use a
telescope, and ones eyes before entering into this branch of our
science.


I agree that more benefit is gained by knowing your scope. I'm well
known for not being a fan of GOTO because I feel it takes away a
degree of challenge from the subject. However, I don't class imaging
like this. Digital imaging is simply an evolution of
astro-photography.

Where are all the observation logs from these great astronomers?
Probably they don't exist, better to take one picture, publish it on
the internet, call ourselves astronomers and pack up for another year,
having gotten out name into the so called Amateur Astronomers Hall of
Fame.


Most images are accompanied by the degree of information that is
required in order to render them in the same science bracket as old
style observing logs. If you're talking about the lengthy observing
descriptions then some people still generate these but they are just
another form of observational recording. An image is just as
important an observation.

Over the past months I have seen no observations worth
reading.....sorry but the art is definately dead...replaced by Mr
Bloggs with his £3000 telescope with which to impress his next door
neighbours...pathetic really!!!


Now this looks more like trolling...
--
Pete Lawrence
http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Come and visit the "Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project"
  #4  
Old December 21st 03, 08:13 PM
Jeroen Smaal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Greg Dortmond" wrote in message
om...
Hello Amateur Astronomers,


I'm sorry. It seems I've misjudged you. Now, Greg, where can we find your
observation logs, sketches, tips for beginning amateurs, tips on making the
most of limited equipment ? Why don't you post some here ?

Jeroen.



  #5  
Old December 21st 03, 08:38 PM
Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greg Dortmond wrote:

Indeed why bother at all? What do you hope togain of benefit in
publishing pictures like this ad nauseum?


Because we're doing this as a hobby, not a profession. As such we like
to share our results, poor though they may sometimes be. That's not the
point though, is it? It's better to keep trying than to give up the
first time we get shot down by elitist idiots.

Our libraries abound with books depicting better pictures of this
nebula than can ever be taken using an amateur CCD.


You could also argue against buying any optical equipment at all in that
case - after all, even those £3000 'scopes aren't going to show you M42
in anything like as much detail as the Hubble Archive, are they?

I'm not belittling your experience - far from it. However, the hobby
will always use the latest technology. It moves on. I've yet to see any
evidence that it loses anything by this.

Jim
--
AIM/iSight:JCAndrew2 - Log in and say 'hi'
"We deal in the moral equivalent of black holes, where the normal
laws of right and wrong break down; beyond those metaphysical
event horizons there exist ... special circumstances" - Use Of Weapons
  #6  
Old December 21st 03, 09:14 PM
Fleetie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Pete Lawrence" wrote

I'll assume you're not trolling. I maybe wrong but you do have some
substance in your posts...

My criticisms are more aimed at those who spend £3000 on a telescope
today, £1000 on a CCD camera tomorrow, publish a picture of the Great
Orion Nebula and call themselves expert astronomers.

Firstly why publish yet another blurred picture?


Why not? It provides yet another benchmark for people looking to get
into the hobby and what to know what their equipment is capable of.
If these images didn't exist on the net then I for one would have been
very happy with my blurred image of Mars earlier this year. Seeing
other people's image made me go back and review my techniques, pushing
my equipment's limits further and further.


Absolutely. I don't even have a telescope. Yet I often enjoy looking
at the pics other people here post links to, and I'm sometimes
really impressed.

Indeed why bother at all? What do you hope togain of benefit in
publishing pictures like this ad nauseum?


Refinement of technique. Pride in being able to capture the images
that only large professional observatories were able to capture a few
years ago.


Again, yes. I always get impressed when I see pictures of nebulae
showing real colours.

I would befit newcomers much more to learn how to properly use a
telescope, and ones eyes before entering into this branch of our
science.


It might be(ne)fit you (Mr. Dortmund) to learn how to use apostrophes,
although I can't tell from your email address whether you're English.
But I always rant about poor English, so don't worry too much!

Over the past months I have seen no observations worth
reading.....sorry but the art is definately dead...replaced by Mr
Bloggs with his £3000 telescope with which to impress his next door
neighbours...pathetic really!!!


No, it's not pathetic, IMO.

And John Doe next door is far too thick and into football to be
impressed by a telescope anyway, so that argument falls at the first.

If you have the money to do that, then good luck to you. I'm not gonna
be overly jealous (and your post suggests a hint of jealousy). It
may well be true that someone rich with a nice 'scope may not be as
knowledgeable as a less-well-off, dedicated observer; nevertheless, IMO,
that does not detract from the validity of the rich person's interest in
her hobby.

Also, as has been mentioned here numerous times, there exists software
to stack, and otherwise enhance, CCD-captured images, which yields a
definite benefit to that method of observation.

Long may it continue that people post URLs to the images that they're
proud of. I, for one, enjoy them.



Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk


  #7  
Old December 21st 03, 09:38 PM
Fleetie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Fleetie" wrote
It might be(ne)fit you (Mr. Dortmund) to learn how to use apostrophes,


And it might benefit me to get people's names right. Sorry. It's
"Dortmond", of course.


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk


  #8  
Old December 22nd 03, 12:06 AM
Roger Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message , Greg
Dortmond wrote
Rant snipped for brevity
Hello Amateur Astronomers,

One astronomer acerts he has been down the pencil sketching route and
over the years has diversed into CCD astrophotography. I take my hat
off to this gentleman who like myself served no doubt many years
apprenticeship, honing his observational skills.

My criticisms are more aimed at those who spend £3000 on a telescope
today, £1000 on a CCD camera tomorrow, publish a picture of the Great
Orion Nebula and call themselves expert astronomers.

Where are all the observation logs from these great astronomers?
Probably they don't exist, better to take one picture, publish it on
the internet, call ourselves astronomers and pack up for another year,
having gotten out name into the so called Amateur Astronomers Hall of
Fame.

Over the past months I have seen no observations worth
reading.....sorry but the art is definately dead...replaced by Mr
Bloggs with his £3000 telescope with which to impress his next door
neighbours...pathetic really!!!

So you are saying that I can only carry on with this hobby I have just
started if I am able to produce a neatly written journal of what I have
observed including clear accurate detailed sketches.

Well excuse me but that attitude (as indicated in some of the books I
looked at when young) is part of what kept me away for 30 odd years. I
had then (as now) fairly poor hand writing and terrible drawing skills.
The impression that you had to make your own telescope from scratch
didn't help.


--
Roger
52:54:41N
01:30:05W
Orion 127mm Maksutov.
  #9  
Old December 22nd 03, 02:36 AM
Xemus younger brother
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 21 Dec 2003 10:20:03 -0800, (Greg Dortmond)
wrote:

Hello Amateur Astronomers,

In my most recent post regarding the seemingly intense growth in
electronic knick-knacks at the expense and demise of observational
astronomy, might I take this opportunity to address those who
seemingly have misinterpreted my claims.

Anyone who takes on the established order will find themselves in the
position your in now.
One astronomer acerts he has been down the pencil sketching route and
over the years has diversed into CCD astrophotography. I take my hat
off to this gentleman who like myself served no doubt many years
apprenticeship, honing his observational skills.

My criticisms are more aimed at those who spend £3000 on a telescope
today, £1000 on a CCD camera tomorrow, publish a picture of the Great
Orion Nebula and call themselves expert astronomers.

Yes indeed. The internet and magazines are full of this stuff. The same
half dozen objects shown over and over again. Add to the images made with
reasonably good amateur cameras we have the awful stuff being produced with
recycled "web cams" I like to think of them as amateur astronomys
equivalent of the old Polaroid camera.

Firstly why publish yet another blurred picture?

It's really a form of masturbation.

I can observe this much better first hand without requiring any
electronic equipement?

Indeed why bother at all? What do you hope togain of benefit in
publishing pictures like this ad nauseum?

Yes why indeed. It's another way of saying look at me! Look how special I
am! I spent all this money and by God I want to know it.

Our libraries abound with books depicting better pictures of this
nebula than can ever be taken using an amateur CCD.

Most don't go to the library or read books but they do understand how to
post to the internet....
I would befit newcomers much more to learn how to properly use a
telescope, and ones eyes before entering into this branch of our
science.

Again correct. I love to watch these clown at star parties struggle with
there expensive telescopes and spend the night looking at their laptop pc
as if that's where the stars really are.

Where are all the observation logs from these great astronomers?
Probably they don't exist, better to take one picture, publish it on
the internet, call ourselves astronomers and pack up for another year,
having gotten out name into the so called Amateur Astronomers Hall of
Fame.

They are sitting at their lap top trying to make a half assed telescope
follow a guide star with some half assed software.

Over the past months I have seen no observations worth
reading.....sorry but the art is definately dead...replaced by Mr
Bloggs with his £3000 telescope with which to impress his next door
neighbours...pathetic really!!!

Well put!
Greg Dortmond


  #10  
Old December 22nd 03, 03:27 AM
Pete Lawrence
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:36:52 -0700, Xemus younger brother
wrote:

Ah - the classic troll pal follow up (or is it the same person?).

Do they sit in their bedrooms thinking up ways that they think they
can bait certain newsgroups?

I wonder if they keep logs of how successful they have been?
--
Pete Lawrence
http://www.pbl33.co.uk
Come and visit the "Lunar Parallax Demonstration Project"
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Father of Arecibo Telescope To Give 40th Anniversary Address Ron Baalke Astronomy Misc 0 October 28th 03 11:35 PM
My e-mail address Jeff Root Astronomy Misc 1 August 31st 03 07:06 PM
Alan the Coward - Where's you address Alan ? starwars Space Shuttle 0 July 31st 03 05:49 AM
Alan the Coward - Where's you address Alan ? starwars Space Station 0 July 31st 03 05:49 AM
Alan the Coward - Where's you address Alan ? starwars Policy 0 July 31st 03 05:49 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.