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

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.

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.

Mike Collins wrote:

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.

I guess so. No defense against shameless psychos ...

On Thursday, January 2, 2014 4:30:36 AM UTC, jwarner1 wrote:
Mike Collins wrote:



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.



I guess so. No defense against shameless psychos ...

Tell me Warner,what do you call people that can force themselves to believe that there are more rotations in any given year than there are 24 hour days ?. You can wander off to the moderated astronomy forum where you get to feel a phony importance again by chanting voodoo and bluffing but not here where the words and works of the great astronomers show up along with imaging to back up or modify their perceptions.

Your idea of astronomy is little more than a consumerist one and even though you are entitled to be an astronomer on that account,the fact that you have everything encased in a rotating celestial sphere and willingly exclude even the most basic astronomical facts has turned that exercise into a disruptive cult.

Cults do not survive in an atmosphere where the great astronomical works are on display and productive topics are being discussed nor are cult members able to operate as they normally do least they disturb what they think of themselves.Why else is there no correspondence in a forum where there is no spam and the only hostility comes from those who won't or can't look at the most basic questions such as what is the cause behind all the effects within a 24 hour day.

Shuffle off to that intellectual oblivion from whence you came,in the rich atmosphere of genuine astronomical discussion your superficial version of astronomy has no home here even though by a God given talent and effort it is offered to all.

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...

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.

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.

RichA wrote:

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.

Fair enough, sir, thanks.

A short time ago, I purchased for my wife's birthday a Meade 102mm
refractor.

It's the "StarNavigator" Series scope, with a really nice tripod, but,
we're finding that perhaps the mount isn't so great. It jiggles a lot
and makes 'by hand' location kind of difficult.

We have not yet set up the computer programmed search and locate
features, but we're reading up on them and are looking forward to doing
so in warmer weather in the Spring.

In the mean time, we've really enjoyed the stunning views of the
Moon...particularly seeing the edges and peaks of craters and mountains
along the south west edges of the image (bad terminology, I know...)

....and we were literally stunned to view an image in a day light sky of
a star, which, when we pointed the scope at it, showed dozens of more
stars in the background...

....then...when we focused the scope on what we'd always thought of as a
star, but it turned out to be a planet and we saw an entire disk in the
image...we're really humbled by the whole thing...

Not a question here I guess, just a statement that in discovering
astronomy, one is sometimes overwhelmed...

Best regards,
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.

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