|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
Time to go.
I have decided to follow the example of the many astronomers who used to visit this site but who drifted away into the sunset when the signal to noise ratio became unendurable. Bye! MN - Shropshire, UK |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
wrote:
Time to go. I have decided to follow the example of the many astronomers who used to visit this site but who drifted away into the sunset when the signal to noise ratio became unendurable. Bye! MN - Shropshire, UK Or in other words Oriel has defeated you. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 11:13:30 AM UTC, Mike Collins wrote:
Or in other words Oriel has defeated you. Students can now learn of the astronomical event which fixes the Earth orbital position in space by using the number of rotations that fit into an orbital circuit. You come from a group who never used a foreground reference for the apparent motion of the stars but went straight to stellar circumpolar motion and tried to squeeze daily and orbital dynamics off the daily rotation North/South orientation like so - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYqh72i2mhg The actual system uses the central Sun as a foreground reference and apparent stellar motion along the line of the ecliptic ,due to the orbital motion of the Earth of course, like so - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeQwYrfmvoQ A sundial registers those 1461 natural noon cycles that cover the distance when Sirius returns to a position far enough to one side of the Sun to be seen thereby defining the Earth's orbital circumference where the time taken for the shadow to return varies with each daily cycle whereas a clock maintains a constant 24 hour AM/PM cycle for the same period. Diverging from the group who wish to use the hopelessly flawed celestial sphere architecture to disengage the 24 hour AM/PM system from planetary dynamics via the incompetence of the short-lived 'leap second' ideology will be another group charged with a thorough investigation into the development of human timekeeping as it actually happened. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:35:49 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Time to go. I have decided to follow the example of the many astronomers who used to visit this site but who drifted away into the sunset when the signal to noise ratio became unendurable. Bye! MN - Shropshire, UK Would that the lurkers ever added anything of substance to counterbalance the noise... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
RichA wrote:
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:35:49 AM UTC-5, wrote: Time to go. I have decided to follow the example of the many astronomers who used to visit this site but who drifted away into the sunset when the signal to noise ratio became unendurable. Bye! MN - Shropshire, UK Would that the lurkers ever added anything of substance to counterbalance the noise... Respectfully and speaking as just one lurker, these things are cyclical and can take some time. The only reason I'm a lurker and not as yet, or at least until now, a participant is that I am new to amateur astronomy and more particularly, new to this newsgroup. I have subscribed to a number of other Usenet newsgroups over the years and have seen the "signal to noise ratio" drive many fine folks away from them. One such group in particular had been incredibly active for decades until an influx of flamers and other general nuisance posters caused a huge attrition. It is sad to witness. However, even without using 'spam filters', I've been able to filter out the "noise" for myself and learn a lot from my reading here at sci.astro.amateur (SAA). Compared to the large number of frivolous newsgroups, SAA is a very worthwhile Usenet group and I would hope that members who are truly valuable to the group and it's purposes will continue to post in spite of the noise they receive. Sincerely, Bert -- Molon Labe. To those who have served or are serving the cause of freedom whether in peace or in war at home or abroad thank you. Si vis pacem para bellum. "Let's roll!"...Todd Beamer, United Airlines Flight 93, September 11, 2001. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 3:12:27 PM UTC-5, Bert Olton wrote:
RichA wrote: On Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:35:49 AM UTC-5, wrote: Time to go. I have decided to follow the example of the many astronomers who used to visit this site but who drifted away into the sunset when the signal to noise ratio became unendurable. Bye! MN - Shropshire, UK Would that the lurkers ever added anything of substance to counterbalance the noise... Respectfully and speaking as just one lurker, these things are cyclical and can take some time. The only reason I'm a lurker and not as yet, or at least until now, a participant is that I am new to amateur astronomy and more particularly, new to this newsgroup. I have subscribed to a number of other Usenet newsgroups over the years and have seen the "signal to noise ratio" drive many fine folks away from them. One such group in particular had been incredibly active for decades until an influx of flamers and other general nuisance posters caused a huge attrition. It is sad to witness. However, even without using 'spam filters', I've been able to filter out the "noise" for myself and learn a lot from my reading here at sci.astro.amateur (SAA). Compared to the large number of frivolous newsgroups, SAA is a very worthwhile Usenet group and I would hope that members who are truly valuable to the group and it's purposes will continue to post in spite of the noise they receive. Sincerely, Bert No one cares if someone asks novice questions, adds novice thoughts. I've observed on other groups that having more legitimate traffic does get rid of spam and it does help dilute the bad traffic. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
Until a few years ago, SAA was one of the best, if not THE best, amateur astronomy newsgroup on the planet. The same lack of structure that made it vulnerable to trolls and cranks gave it a spontaneity that just doesn't happen in more structured, moderated, groups. There's no reason that amateur astronomers can't take it back.
Marty |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:36:07 AM UTC, Marty wrote:
Until a few years ago, SAA was one of the best, if not THE best, amateur astronomy newsgroup on the planet. The same lack of structure that made it vulnerable to trolls and cranks gave it a spontaneity that just doesn't happen in more structured, moderated, groups. There's no reason that amateur astronomers can't take it back. Marty Take it back from what Marty !!.There is no spam,there is no obligation to read anyone's posts so unless people are afraid to look foolish I cannot see why a counter assault is needed. The moderated forums are sterile and designed to maintain a view people have of themselves as 'astronomers' through a magnification exercise and a very,very homocentric view and description of the celestial arena through a rotating celestial sphere framework,personally I think it is a disruptive cult as it interferes with cause and effect between planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects . I wouldn't mind but you can have your system and the ability to identify objects without any complaint from me but students are never,ever properly taught what the great astronomers did and that I do mind. Men generally know how to act when circumstances change but in this case I don't see it and the crawling away and hiding solution isn't an option for any productive and creative work. If all you can offer the world Marty is to identify celestial objects along with a poetic description then fair enough but that would limit astronomy to an exercise that is at best twilit compared to the sparkling adventure astronomy actually is and once was.Just as you pine for a more active SAA so do I wish to see the restoration of astronomy as it once existed across the many thousands of years people have looked out into the celestial arena .. I realize that the unique advantages of the 21st century can do exactly that and if you cannot keep up then no worries or problem but I doubt if people here can maintain a discussion here for more than a few posts of a one line response because there is so little you can talk about among yourselves. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
"oriel36" wrote in message ... On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:36:07 AM UTC, Marty wrote: Until a few years ago, SAA was one of the best, if not THE best, amateur astronomy newsgroup on the planet. The same lack of structure that made it vulnerable to trolls and cranks gave it a spontaneity that just doesn't happen in more structured, moderated, groups. There's no reason that amateur astronomers can't take it back. Marty Take it back from what Marty !!.There is no spam,there is no obligation to read anyone's posts so unless people are afraid to look foolish I cannot see why a counter assault is needed. The moderated forums are sterile and designed to maintain a view people have of themselves as 'astronomers' through a magnification exercise and a very,very homocentric view and description of the celestial arena through a rotating celestial sphere framework,personally I think it is a disruptive cult as it interferes with cause and effect between planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects . I wouldn't mind but you can have your system and the ability to identify objects without any complaint from me but students are never,ever properly taught what the great astronomers did and that I do mind. Men generally know how to act when circumstances change but in this case I don't see it and the crawling away and hiding solution isn't an option for any productive and creative work. If all you can offer the world Marty is to identify celestial objects along with a poetic description then fair enough but that would limit astronomy to an exercise that is at best twilit compared to the sparkling adventure astronomy actually is and once was.Just as you pine for a more active SAA so do I wish to see the restoration of astronomy as it once existed across the many thousands of years people have looked out into the celestial arena . I realize that the unique advantages of the 21st century can do exactly that and if you cannot keep up then no worries or problem but I doubt if people here can maintain a discussion here for more than a few posts of a one line response because there is so little you can talk about among yourselves. ========================================== You tell 'em, Kelleher, you are not afraid to look foolish, are you? -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Waving goodbye
In Marty
wrote: Until a few years ago, SAA was one of the best, if not THE best, amateur astronomy newsgroup on the planet. The same lack of structure that made it vulnerable to trolls and cranks gave it a spontaneity that just doesn't happen in more structured, moderated, groups. There's no reason that amateur astronomers can't take it back. Marty The obvious first step is to use your news client's filter or killfile mechansim. But, since you're a googlegrouper, I guess you're just stuck. -- St. Paul, MN |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bill Clinton, first lady waving as she gets off airplane. 4 years of first lady. | gb6726 | Astronomy Misc | 3 | October 5th 07 04:28 PM |
Chinese astronauts safely landed and waving to public. | Jan Panteltje | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 16th 05 10:41 PM |
What's Waving?? Answer: Disturbed Quantum Vacuum | nightbat | Misc | 42 | May 18th 05 07:33 PM |
Goodbye to everyone | Stormin Mormon | Space Shuttle | 0 | July 19th 03 06:30 PM |