NavList:

   

Reply

Peter Fogg said-

>The present Nav. List seems to be dominated by crabby old men who seem to
>love the detailed complexities, and take great relish in arguing about the
>number of angels able to dance on the head of a pin to an absurd and
>mind-numbing extent, in the process flaunting their superior knowledge and
>understanding.

Well, as the archetypal "crabby old man", I know one when I see one, and
recognise my well-painted picture there. But if Peter wishes to make a
personal verbal assault, why on earth doesn't he name names?

We need to remember that Peter's reaction was in response to my criticism
of his favourite book on navigation, which is clearly dear to his heart.

In a previous mailing, he had made a claim, as follows-

>As someone who has used this book extensively I can say
>that I have never had a problem with the azimuth tables. I can check the
>tables' result with that given by my nav. calculator, accurate to a tenth of
>a degree, and if it is out by more than a degree or so I invariably find the
>fault has been mine.

=======================

I challenged that claim in these terms-

>I do not dispute that there are situations in which the calculated azimuth
>might well be acceptably accurate, and said so in my last mailing.
>
>However, I ask Peter if he has checked out the two examples that I
>provided, and compared the azimuth result from Bennett's table with that
>given by his nav. calculator, and if not, to do so, please. And I ask him
>to REPORT HIS RESULTS BACK TO US. If he finds a discrepancy between the
>Bennett azimuth and his own calculator (which he will), I hope he will then
>tell us where he thinks the fault lies.
>
>Example 1. dec = 55deg 29', LHA = 54deg 31', alt = 61deg 31'.
>
>Example 2. dec = 55deg 31', LHA = 54deg 29', alt = 61deg 29' .
>
>I chose those examples to show up where the faults in the method are near
>their worst, but have no reason to think that they are in any way unique.
>Any observation taken in a generally East or West direction (and my
>examples are about 15 degrees away from the true East-West line) will be
>susceptible to such inaccuracies.

======================

Peter hasn't responded to that request, except with verbal abuse.
We can draw our own conclusions about the strength of his arguments.

There are many who prefer the comfort of their own preconceptions, to the
challenge of rational argument and fact. All they have to do is to press
the delete button.

I see that even a supporter finds my style "intimidating". Well, sorry
about that. I hadn't thought of it that way. I will try to make it less so,
but not sure how, or whether that will be successful. If any party in a
discussion feels that he's being browbeaten, by me or anyone else, I hope
that he will say so.

I rather enjoy a good argument, as list members (and my wife also) may have
observed. Both sides initially think they are right, and when it's about a
matter of fact, one needs to convince the other. My method of argument may
be robust, but sometimes, against deeply ingrained beliefs, that's
necessary. In our subject of astronavigation, with its long history, many
popular misunderstandings are still around. I certainly don't claim to be
always right, and hope that when I get things wrong I am ready to admit it.


Listmembers are welcome to respond just as robustly; preferably using
logical reasoning and fact rather than personal abuse. To those of us that
have been privileged with a scientific background, that may come easily,
but we have to allow for others who may feel that an attack on their
long-held beliefs is an attack on them, and respond accordingly.

I agree with Peter Fogg, to this extent only. This list should be
welcoming, and responsive, to entry-level celestial navigators, and help
them through any problems they will meet, and here the Silicon Sea
exercises fill a valuable role.

However, this list also provides another function. To those of us who have
done all that introductory stuff, years ago, some of the fine-points and
abstruse-topics and historical-questions are of great interest, and the
Nav-L list is our method of communicating with each other about it. Would
Peter Fogg deny us that?

George.


================================================================
contact George Huxtable by email at george@huxtable.u-net.com, by phone at
01865 820222 (from outside UK, +44 1865 820222), or by mail at 1 Sandy
Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK.
================================================================

   

Reply