[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) potentially hazardous objects (PHA's)
In a message dated 98-02-20 12:36:15 EST, you write:
<< I think you misinterpret our skepticism regarding some of the claims
made as not being interested in the problem. Nothing could be further from
the truth. However, we are looking for facts here, and frankly, the article
that was in flatoday was fluff, filled with hype and hysteria, without any
support. Such fearmongering, without factual basis, only serves to
discredit the true science involved in the search for, and the danger of,
possible earth impactors, which we are indeed interested in.
You accuse us of not being aroused into action...yet do you have a
real basis for making that claim? Are you aware that the NJAA has applied
for grants to use our 26" scope to search for NEO's?
I assume not. I have contacted newspapers and broadcast media to correct
scientific errors, and get the facts out there, dealing firsthand with much
ignorance regarding science in those who have the public's eyes and ears. >>
<<remainder of this excellent reply snipped>>
As a shameless plug for our club (yes, Wayne and I belong to the same org.) we
have actually begun to search for NEO's with the limited resources we have
since the grant was turned down (where have we heard that before).
So you can add at least 6 more pairs of eyes scanning for the safety of the
world. :)
My take on it is that we have to be very careful as astronomers, amateur or
professional, in choosing words correctly when talking to the powers to be.
Very often we are considered yahoos who stay up all night staring at an empty
sky.
I don't want to say people are becoming more illiterate, but I've definitely
noticed that "its cool to be mediocre." I can't even count the number of times
working in the Observatory and people saying, after a tour of the facility and
some telescope time: "Wow astrology is sooo cool." This is what we're up
against. Go to a local bookstore, not the big mega stores, but regular
storefront bookstores. Just observe the other sections in the store and then
go to the science section. I don't know about anyone else but my local store
has about 6 small shelves dedicated to science (about 1 shelf worth of
astronomy) and how many shelves are for - cooking , only about 20. Get the
point? Look at what we have to go through to get something done about light
pollution. All the leaders in this fight stress -Do NOT MENTION Astronomy - or
we'd be ignored from the get-go. Thank the maker we can fall back on the
environment and energy problem in the LP fight.
So its not the fact that we don't care, its the fact that we have to be very
careful and avoid the "Chicken Little Syndrome." BTW - you're right scarcasm
doesn't transfer well the the typed word.
I've rambled enough, thanks for the read.
Kevin