The Astronomy Hall of Lame

It's strange how there seems to be so little astronomy in this
ukastronomy guy's hall of shame.

Most of it is him griping about people and things.

But even stranger still, seeing as it is a hall of shame, it never
mentions how he uses identities like ianhillsmith and johnhampton14 to
pretend to be someone else, how he pretends to be eric whiting and
hannah varley to congratulate himself, and attack people who show up
his bad astronomy.

The shameful way his ianhillsmith identity attacks amateurs and
professionals alike on usenet groups over the years nevers appears in
the hall. Or when he attacked Professor Richmond because the
professor told people that it was impossible to find hundreds and
thousands of new novae per year, and to be careful of schemes that
claimed such and asked for money, but called himself mr ictexamboard
and claimed he was being "censored" when in fact his bad science was
being corrected.

Nor the shameful way these people use the same modem as him when they
claim to come from all over the world. Like when he and Hannah took
it in turns on the narrowband imaging yahoo group to encourage people
to pay up for the rentalscopes.

The shameful way he puts stuff on his web pages without making it
clear what are his and what are SDSS images.

The shameful way nearly half the people on usenet groups who say they
like his stuff and he should continue producing it are him. The
shameful way he attacks professional astronomers in Washington DC and
agrees with himself that they are bad via his ian hill smith alias
when his work doesn't pass scientific standards thereby not enabling
them to use it. And when you read all his work, that is always what
it boils down to in the end when he attacks, simply that they did not
use his name somewhere nor mention his work.

The shameful way he lifted wholesale the entire DIRBE point source
catalog variable flagged objects from the published paper and tried to
publish them as unreported variables. Thousands of published objects
claimed as his own. Just as many of his more accurate doubles (and
they are rare) have at times been known for a century.

How he claims on usenet groups to be so experienced and long standing
an astronomer, whilst asking novice questions to troll on yahoo groups
asking people to do all his work for him, like a school kid before the
end of spring break who hasn't done their homework yet and goes online
to ask how to do things because the report has to be in tomorrow.

The way he claims to be connected to this scientific group which is
just a rentascope user group which gets discounts from the rentascope
firm for people who claim to do science work, but shamefully when you
examine their web site very, very little actual science appears to
have ever been published even after several years, and very little of
what has been published is in known and recognised longstanding
science journals that the general public would recognise as such and
not mistake for hobbyist fanzines, and even that little that has been
published has been mostly done by someone else, not him. Shamefully
it doesn't explain that whilst he keeps paying the rent he gets the
service, even though he produces no science to justify the rules
appertaining to the discount. But they keep getting his rent, so he
has no need to worry. Steady income.

The shameful way he accuses people of being ill if they disagree with
him or for posting regularly on things he doesn't like, whilst nearly
every day he forwards links from his pages of Cassini and SDSS images
to usenet from open source places where people can find them
themselves if they want.

None of this is in his astronomy hall of shame, even though it is all
shameful, but there's little astronomy in his astronomy hall of shame
either, so I suppose that makes sense.

I wish that bad astronomy guy would look at his web site. He probably
wouldn't know where to start though.