Catalog of ExoPlanets
-
brought to you by The Planetary Society "features an up-to-date list of all known exoplanets, along with essential information about each..." [^] :cool: :thumbsup:
Steve _________________ I C(++) therefore I am
We need a smiley that wears reading glasses (geek style) instead of shades.
-
You want to live on Psychlo? :)
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on! A post a day, keeps the white coats away!
Steve Echols wrote:
Psychlo
All right, dammit. I haven't even finished my coffee and you're making me projectile regurgitate? Mention that bilge-sucking psychotic crap again and we'll have to rough you up. Maybe even force you to baby-sit in the VB forum for a few days.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Steve Echols wrote:
Psychlo
All right, dammit. I haven't even finished my coffee and you're making me projectile regurgitate? Mention that bilge-sucking psychotic crap again and we'll have to rough you up. Maybe even force you to baby-sit in the VB forum for a few days.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Xenu
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
The stupid! It buuurrrrrnnnnssss!
Software Zen:
delete this; -
The stupid! It buuurrrrrnnnnssss!
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Thermonuclear volcanic psychofire.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
Homeopathic vulvanic gefrakkenscheit! So there!
Software Zen:
delete this; -
brought to you by The Planetary Society "features an up-to-date list of all known exoplanets, along with essential information about each..." [^] :cool: :thumbsup:
Steve _________________ I C(++) therefore I am
This stuff makes me laugh. "Oh, that star looks wibbly, therefore there are planets going around it -- there can be no other explanation!" In fact the whole of astronomy makes me laugh. It's the only "science" that's actually less of a science than psychology. Astronomers pile assumption upon presumption with no compunction.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Steve Echols wrote:
Psychlo
All right, dammit. I haven't even finished my coffee and you're making me projectile regurgitate? Mention that bilge-sucking psychotic crap again and we'll have to rough you up. Maybe even force you to baby-sit in the VB forum for a few days.
Software Zen:
delete this;:laugh: Breathe-gas. There, that ought to do it. :)
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on! A post a day, keeps the white coats away!
-
This stuff makes me laugh. "Oh, that star looks wibbly, therefore there are planets going around it -- there can be no other explanation!" In fact the whole of astronomy makes me laugh. It's the only "science" that's actually less of a science than psychology. Astronomers pile assumption upon presumption with no compunction.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
The Apollo missions were faked, too? :~
Software Zen:
delete this; -
The Apollo missions were faked, too? :~
Software Zen:
delete this;Gary Wheeler wrote:
The Apollo missions were faked, too?
The Ozzie observatory that was tracking the first moonshot faked it for a while! :) But, if umpty-percent of the universe is "dark matter" (the actual figure varies, depending on what is convenient to the individual astronomer's assumptions), and we don't know the behaviour or properties of this stuff -- or, indeed, the properties of interstellar space -- then how the Hell do we know that the tiny, little bit of electromagnetic radiation that hits our observatories actually represents what they interpret it to represent -- or that anything they "see" is actually within a couple of yotta of light years of where they claim it is? And saying "Ooh! A wibble! I can create equations that prove there are planets!" is worthy of Douglas Adams! We can barely tell what our own solar system's outer planets are like, by observing them with telescopes -- and the few fly-pasts have been full of huge surprises -- so why is it that we so eagerly trust the word of people who say that they can tell you exactly what is going on billions upon billions of times further away? Astronomy = a big-budget p1ss-take; it's barely a rung up from astrology.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
The Apollo missions were faked, too?
The Ozzie observatory that was tracking the first moonshot faked it for a while! :) But, if umpty-percent of the universe is "dark matter" (the actual figure varies, depending on what is convenient to the individual astronomer's assumptions), and we don't know the behaviour or properties of this stuff -- or, indeed, the properties of interstellar space -- then how the Hell do we know that the tiny, little bit of electromagnetic radiation that hits our observatories actually represents what they interpret it to represent -- or that anything they "see" is actually within a couple of yotta of light years of where they claim it is? And saying "Ooh! A wibble! I can create equations that prove there are planets!" is worthy of Douglas Adams! We can barely tell what our own solar system's outer planets are like, by observing them with telescopes -- and the few fly-pasts have been full of huge surprises -- so why is it that we so eagerly trust the word of people who say that they can tell you exactly what is going on billions upon billions of times further away? Astronomy = a big-budget p1ss-take; it's barely a rung up from astrology.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/[^]
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Gary Wheeler wrote:
The Apollo missions were faked, too?
The Ozzie observatory that was tracking the first moonshot faked it for a while! :) But, if umpty-percent of the universe is "dark matter" (the actual figure varies, depending on what is convenient to the individual astronomer's assumptions), and we don't know the behaviour or properties of this stuff -- or, indeed, the properties of interstellar space -- then how the Hell do we know that the tiny, little bit of electromagnetic radiation that hits our observatories actually represents what they interpret it to represent -- or that anything they "see" is actually within a couple of yotta of light years of where they claim it is? And saying "Ooh! A wibble! I can create equations that prove there are planets!" is worthy of Douglas Adams! We can barely tell what our own solar system's outer planets are like, by observing them with telescopes -- and the few fly-pasts have been full of huge surprises -- so why is it that we so eagerly trust the word of people who say that they can tell you exactly what is going on billions upon billions of times further away? Astronomy = a big-budget p1ss-take; it's barely a rung up from astrology.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
It's not really fair to use the fact that they are unclear about certain things to dismiss the whole thing is it ?
-
It's not really fair to use the fact that they are unclear about certain things to dismiss the whole thing is it ?
Maybe not, but I'm annoyed with the absolute certainty with which they declare that they've discovered umpty-tum planets, when the fact is that they have no solid proof that they've discovered what appears to be wobbles (which may well be the result of the light from the stars passing through or near something on the way here). It's unscientific hokum. Any real scientist would be ashamed of making such unfounded assertions.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
