(meteorobs) Repost- Clear evidence for Meteoroidejecta/outgassing.
Chris Peterson
clp at alumni.caltech.edu
Mon Sep 14 09:49:19 EDT 2009
Hi Dave-
I think that's bad advice. If an idea won't hold up to scrutiny during
development, a researcher is likely to waste a lot of time with it. Most of
the best new ideas in science are at least modified during development due
to input from others. If Larry (or anybody else) gets a serious objection
posed to his methodology (such as "you can't compare intensities where the
data is saturated), he at least has an opportunity to create a better test.
Without feedback, that chance is lost, and the work proceeds with faulty
input from early on. To treat such objections as some kind of personal
attack makes no sense.
Certainly, there's nothing remotely scientific about "stick[ing] with your
beliefs" in the face of evidence to the contrary. That's pretty much the
definition of pseudoscience.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <prospector at znet.com>
To: "Global Meteor Observing Forum" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 1:18 AM
Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Repost- Clear evidence for
Meteoroidejecta/outgassing.
> Larry,
>
> Sometimes you just have to stick with your beliefs and stand in the
> current. Scientists and others are often very skeptical of new ideas, but
> with your ability to record meteors you have a better chance to build
> proof. They do have all those other photos, but are they ALL showing what
> they claim to show or are some of them proof of your idea? Maybe they are
> too quick to explain and miss differences. Work quietly and write about it
> some day. Dave English
More information about the Meteorobs
mailing list