I've looked at both the ISR and the Star Wishing and I'm afraid I need your help here. Could someone please point to the specific claims made on the websites that constitute false advertising?
I think many of you are hung up on the "authority" end of it:
Quote:
|
Glom wrote: But they don't have the right to formally name those stars. So the company is lying. The punter has the right to informally name those stars, of course, but they didn't need to shell out £100 to these con men for the privilege.
|
What do you mean they don't have the right? Who gave professional astronomers the right? Who gave the Greeks the right? Everybody has the right and if you want to publish your names in a book you can. Its precisely because the name is not formal that I don't see the problem.
Look, as I said they are offering a service. Astronomers don't name stars after people, but these people will. You send them 50 or 100 bucks and they'll pick out a star and publish a book with it listed. They'll provide the coordinates coordinates and a corny certificate and perhaps some little book that may or may not be informative. That is what the people are paying for - to be listed in the registry started by this or that naming company.
You created a list of stars with names you made up and you are correct in that you have as much right as the star registry people to do that. But have you published a book of your names? The Star Registry does. And that is the point. That is what people are paying for. Most people are presumably buying these star names for sentimental or romantic reasons.
I really don't see where anybody has made a compelling case that what these companies are doing is wrong or misleading. I certainly think they could be a little better. They should clearly state that their names are not formally recognized by professional astronomers and they don't do that, but neither do they say anything that would directly give that impression. They should point out that the purchaser will need to go to a local public observatory if they want to see the star. They definitely don't do that either.
But neither of those two issues invalidates their right to offer the service they are offering.
Quote:
|
M Welander wrote: And that, my friends, is precisely the reason why I feel scientific names are so important, no matter if they are assigned to flowers or stars. In a small, closed community, home made names can certainly make sense. But we don't live in such a world any more. That's why it is so important to always use the proper, scientific name, for both flowers and stars.
|
And they publish a book with the names so if somebody really wants to they can go look it up. But most people won't care. The people that buy these star names are only going to care about the fact that they have a star out there that they gave a name to and that somebody has published in a book for them. That name has no more or less validity than the scientific names.
I've seen a lot of debates on the BABB about religion imposing upon science. I've got to say I think people need to step back and look at the other side of this. What business is it of the scientific community to go telling a company that they cannot publish a book with stars named by the average person? This sounds like science imposing upon something that is meant to be a little bit of fun. Or are we saying that only scientists have rights to the universe?
Should we file a complaint with Astronomy and Sky&Telescope magazines for referring to the Lagoon Nebula and the Owl nebula, and the wild duck cluster? They are M-8 and, and M-97, and M-11. Or wait - should we be calling them by their NGC numbers? Do they have other catalog numbers? Which one is correct?
I also seem to recall that it was David Eicher that coined the term "Owl Cluster" for the open cluster NGC 457 (which does look like an owl - very pretty!). Was there something wrong with him doing that? Of course not because it served a specific purpose - it was a catchy way of giving a description of the appearance of the cluster in a backyard telescope. By the same token the star naming companies have a specific purpose they are fulfulling with their service. It is not meant to be scientific. It is not advertised as scientific and I don't see where a case has been made that it is the business of scientists to declare these star naming companies as a scam. From what I can see they are offering the product they claim to be offering - a star named by you the purchaser published in their registry.