Comments for One Astronomer's Noise

Comment on A Non-Scientist's Reaction to Richard Hoagland by Julius Gavin

Julius Gavin — Wed, 22 May 2013 12:38:19 +0000

In reading these responses I see how the “World is flat” scenario lasted so long. Not one attempt has been made to address the torsion field physics work of Kozyrev or others but alot of time has been spent with personal slander and 5th. grade antics. Small minds lead to small conclusions.

Comment on So what's your sign, baby? by Loida Facemire

Loida Facemire — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 14:01:49 +0000

What exactly is a horoscope? You have to understand that is basically where the stars and planets are positioned in certain time frames. You will find that many of astrologers will make a chart and it will stay a lot about who you are and why you are who you are. As for the horoscope chart, you will find that the wheel is separated into twelve parts and it has many symbols drawn on it to represent things like the planets and the stars. You will also find that there are many horoscope signs, but each one is unique in its own way.”

Most interesting article on our internet page
<'http://www.caramoanpackage.com/

Comment on Dining, Red Dwarf Style by Retired Catholic

Retired Catholic — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 04:17:50 +0000

Actually the eggs are just about perfect for this sandwich. You still get the yokey taste without the added mess-I have a hard enough time with these as it is. These are also great with Trader Joe’s Jalapeno Spiced Tartar Sauce. Best Sandwich spread on the planet.

Comment on Insider’s Look at a Radio Observatory by Angela Williams

Angela Williams — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:00:47 +0000

Well done young lady!
It is great that you are make a name for Astronmy and Astrophisics!

Ang

Comment on Insider’s Look at a Radio Observatory by Scot

Scot — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:26:29 +0000

Awesome video! Thanks so much!!

Comment on Dining, Red Dwarf Style by McClaurin

McClaurin — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:40:01 +0000

2690 years of civilization and refinement of human needs led to this.

Comment on So I’ll be in Texas… AND in Chile! by Chris

Chris — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:21:52 +0000

Ahhh, your so lucky, I would love a chance to head out into the Atacama and visit the Telescopes One day, I shall go

Comment on A Non-Scientist's Reaction to Richard Hoagland by indigopete

indigopete — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:01:25 +0000

…just another point – in those same search results, Google reports the blog post as being “by Nicole Gugliucci”. So when the crowds parachute in, they are pre-primed to think it’s written by her. There is even a photo of her in the listing under the blog post title.

Comment on A Non-Scientist's Reaction to Richard Hoagland by indigopete

indigopete — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:53:36 +0000

Re. “the content should be taken with a grain of salt”

Indeed. The responses are out of context in that case – mainly because people thought they were talking to a post doctorate in Astronomy. We’ll try to read the small print next time but maybe I’d better fill you in on what’s going on with your page.

Hoagland has a massive presence on the internet (for better or worse). He’s recently been running around the world doing “torsion field” measurements at various megalithic sites. You’re here innocently posting on a quiet wee blog which happens to have risen to number 4 in the world rankings out of 30,000 results for the search term “hoagland torsion”.

So you’re getting folk parachuting in here from all over the place with no idea of what this blog is about except a commentary on Hoagland with most are used to seeing plus what appears to be the identity of the commentator down the side panel. “By Tim” was in microscopic print below the main headline which no-one is ever going to see during a 30 second glance to see what this is about.

Maybe you should take some commercials – might make some hard cash for your efforts

Regards

Pete

Comment on A Non-Scientist's Reaction to Richard Hoagland by Tim

Tim — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:54:30 +0000

Nope, still confused. It is Nicole’s blog, but I guest post. As it says in the 2nd paragraph of the about page, which contain links to my own blogs (which has this post reposted there). I guess it goes along great with your statement about “best not to look”

Regardless of that, this post was written as a non-scientist watching a television show with Hoaglund. It was not meant to be a scientific study of him or a positive or negative review of his beliefs or science. I am a communications student, so how a message is taken by the public (and how a science message is taken by non-scientists) is important for science communications. My post was satirical and sarcasm, but showing that regardless of whether he is right, wrong, has evidence or is making shit up…this is how it comes across to some people.

As the note at the end also says, post contains sarcasm. Since that is so, the content should be taken with a grain of salt.