I wouldn't call it sensationalism, but whomever wrote that obviously is not an imager and lacks meteor shower experience. The high cirrus that blew-in close to the peak wasn't very nice, either. Personally I wouldn't mind if the press just left meteor showers alone. Then sites like Little Mountain would be useful again. Let the masses sleep- it's a case of pearls before swine. And this time the pearls weren't that shiny anyway. --- Patrick Wiggins <paw@trilobyte.net> wrote:
Chuck Hards wrote:
I was VERY skeptical about the press calling this year's conditions "ideal".
Believe it or not, when they said that many were quoting Sky & Telescope (who _obviously_ should know better). I'd expect that sort of sensationalism from Astronomy but not S&T.
Patrick
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail