Why CosmoQuest?

[IreneAnt]

CosmoQuest was started by a group of like-minded people, who want to build a community where scientists, programmers, and citizens can work collaboratively to do science and learn about our universe together.

Like other citizen science projects, we want to tap into the amazing potential of crowd-sourcing --- that's YOU! But, we also want to give something back in return; the opportunity to learn.

Learning will be the main focus of CosmoQuest; learning by the scientists, learning by the programmers, learning by you... learning collectively about the universe through the research we do together. We encourage collaboration and cross fertilization of ideas between the various research components that make up CosmoQuest, be it Moon Mappers, Saturn Investigators, or anything else this community decides to pursue. Our programmers are keen to find out how best to maximize our science, be it a new widget, a faster interface, or a bold new project. And, we hope that you are looking to learn as much as you can about our universe. To help you, we promise to provide as many learning opportunities as possible, including tutorials, educational programs, and eventually free on-line classes. We have even partnered with NASA to make sure you get the most exciting and up -to-date data to look at. See our About Us page for more details on what's to come.

We hope you join us for this ride. It promises to be an exciting one.

[MikeSimonsen]

Looks like spam filtering id still a work in progress. Good luck.

[astrostu]

Looks like spam filtering id still a work in progress. Good luck.

Indeed. We're working on it ...

[chrys]

Thank you for the opportunity to learn.

[Shigeru]

Thanks for all, for the opportunity to learn and contribute. I will looking forward to see all that is coming!

[Georgia]

Welcome Shigeru! Thank you for joining us!

[hsapiens]

Hello everyone! It is a great idea for collaboration and learning! My childish dream and some possible way for escape. Good luck!

[Georgia]

Welcome, hsapiens! Glad you're here!

[kmasterdo]

Welcome from me, too!

[hsapiens]

: D Regards for all: Stardust of Nad

[Shigeru]

Welcome ^^

[DaleSpace]

My last comment was worded too strongly. I certainly enjoy and learn from Astronomy Cast and the Moon Mapping is challenging and is helping science. I noticed Pamela had a MoonMapper up on her screen Sunday but I wasn't able to stick around. If every couple of weeks some tutorial thing like that could be announced to show members what CosmoQuest is learning from the Moon Mapper exercise, I know I'd be able to do a better job at Moon Mapping.

[Tranan]

Hi DaleSpace

Its good that you are able to help. and your effort is needed, and practice make perfect.

And welcome to the team.

[DocBlitzbottom]

Happy to be here.

[dapifo]

CosmoQuest was started by a group of like-minded people, who want to build a community where scientists, programmers, and citizens can work collaboratively to do science and learn about our universe together.

Like other citizen science projects, we want to tap into the amazing potential of crowd-sourcing --- that's YOU! But, we also want to give something back in return; the opportunity to learn.

Learning will be the main focus of CosmoQuest; learning by the scientists, learning by the programmers, learning by you... learning collectively about the universe through the research we do together. We encourage collaboration and cross fertilization of ideas between the various research components that make up CosmoQuest, be it Moon Mappers, Saturn Investigators, or anything else this community decides to pursue. Our programmers are keen to find out how best to maximize our science, be it a new widget, a faster interface, or a bold new project. And, we hope that you are looking to learn as much as you can about our universe. To help you, we promise to provide as many learning opportunities as possible, including tutorials, educational programs, and eventually free on-line classes. We have even partnered with NASA to make sure you get the most exciting and up -to-date data to look at. See our About Us page for more details on what's to come.

We hope you join us for this ride. It promises to be an exciting one.

I think that you do not fulfill your initial objectives ..."to build a community where scientists, programmers, and citizens can work collaboratively to do science and learn about our universe together."

[slang]

I think that you do not fulfill your initial objectives ..."to build a community where scientists, programmers, and citizens can work collaboratively to do science and learn about our universe together."

dapifo has opened a thread in the Feedback forum, "Why I can not have a free discussion with free people from the forum ?", please respond to this post there so we don't get the same discussion in two places.

[DoggerDan]

CosmoQuest was started by a group of like-minded people, who want to build a community where scientists, programmers, and citizens can work collaboratively to do science and learn about our universe together.

Like other citizen science projects, we want to tap into the amazing potential of crowd-sourcing --- that's YOU! But, we also want to give something back in return; the opportunity to learn.

Learning will be the main focus of CosmoQuest; learning by the scientists, learning by the programmers, learning by you... learning collectively about the universe through the research we do together. We encourage collaboration and cross fertilization of ideas between the various research components that make up CosmoQuest, be it Moon Mappers, Saturn Investigators, or anything else this community decides to pursue. Our programmers are keen to find out how best to maximize our science, be it a new widget, a faster interface, or a bold new project. And, we hope that you are looking to learn as much as you can about our universe. To help you, we promise to provide as many learning opportunities as possible, including tutorials, educational programs, and eventually free on-line classes. We have even partnered with NASA to make sure you get the most exciting and up -to-date data to look at. See our About Us page for more details on what's to come.

We hope you join us for this ride. It promises to be an exciting one.

These are admirable goals! The thing of it is, learning doesn't happen inside the tiny box of political correctness. It happens when people expand their horizons. I've only been here (from BAUTforum) a year, yet it's painfully obvious any comment falling outside the box of political correctness gets unbelievably hammered by one or more mods who probably are scientists, but poor ones unwilling to think outside the box. I made a fortune by ignoring the experts who kept telling me "it can't be done," so I don't have a lot of respect for people who can't think outside the box.

You'll need a whole lot more of that "can do" attitude among the mods before I'd ever float an idea on which I'd like to collaborate with others. This remains a great place for sharing one's weather and talking about science fiction, though!

Again, IreneAnt - your statements are admirable! While I'm sure your inside-the-box learning will happen as planned, and I have high hopes that it will, "collaboration and cross fertilization of ideas between the various research components" will never happen in an oppressive atmosphere that hammers everyone who dares challenge the status quo. If you want to achieve your goals, this site will need to start encouraging such thinking instead of hammering it.

Just my $0.02...

I wish you all the best in your collective learning efforts -- great idea to partner with NASA!

[Swift]

These are admirable goals! The thing of it is, learning doesn't happen inside the tiny box of political correctness. It happens when people expand their horizons. I've only been here (from BAUTforum) a year, yet it's painfully obvious any comment falling outside the box of political correctness gets unbelievably hammered by one or more mods who probably are scientists, but poor ones unwilling to think outside the box. I made a fortune by ignoring the experts who kept telling me "it can't be done," so I don't have a lot of respect for people who can't think outside the box.

Frankly, I find that more than a little insulting. I am more than a little tired of people using the term "political correctness" as an insult and I am more than a little tired of being accussed of being closed minded.

In the sense that we do not tolerate rudeness and that we demand that people treat each other kindly and with respect, yes, we are politically correct and proud of it. I do not think learning happens in a rude and painful environment.

But as far as our science, I do not see that "political correctness" has anything to do with what goes on here. We are demanding when it comes to our science; that is exactly how science works. Some of the most creative people I have ever met have also been the most rigorous with their methods. Imagination without rigor is just randomness and babbling. It is easy to dismiss that rigor and that demand for evidence and critical thinking by accussing others of a lack of imagination, but frankly, it is a tired, old, undemonstrated complaint.

[Nereid]

DoggerDan, I think you've added 2 to 2 and got 9,435!

IreneAnt is (was) clearly referring to the CosmoQuest of January 2012, not the post-BAUT-merger CosmoQuest.

The "research components" at that time were rather narrow, and focused on the sort of Citizen Science that Moon Mappers is a good example of.

My take? CosmoQuest seeks (sought) to do the sort of thing that Galaxy Zoo - and later the Zooniverse - did, but in a different way (different approach, different platform, etc)*. In that regard, the kind of research envisioned is (was) of the hands-on variety, dealing directly with the vast sea of high quality astronomical data that the community is awash with today (if I may mix metaphors somewhat) ...

In my many years here in BAUT, I've come across very few (but > 0) BAUTians who've been willing to roll up their sleeves and test their "out of the box" ideas using even a tiny fraction of the data that's freely available. In fact, I'd say almost none have had any real idea of what the data are, how it was obtained, how to access it, etc.

Perhaps you're one of those few? Or perhaps your "can do" refers to theoretical astrophysics?

* If you're not familiar with Galaxy Zoo, check out this post of mine, and the links in it.

[Noclevername]

I made a fortune by ignoring the experts who kept telling me "it can't be done," so I don't have a lot of respect for people who can't think outside the box.

Business is about getting people to give you money. Science is about accuracy and checking facts. They aren't just apples and oranges, they're apples and postgrad thesis.

[DoggerDan]

Frankly, I find that more than a little insulting.

I'm sorry you find honest, heart-felt feedback "insulting." It's feedback. It's not personal. Take it or leave it.

I am more than a little tired of being accussed of being closed minded.

I never accused you of being close-minded.

...yes, we are politically correct and proud of it.

That's the problem. Political correctness is "a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, certain other religions, beliefs or ideologies, disability, and age-related contexts, and, as purported by the term, doing so to an excessive extent." - Wikipedia (I added the italics for emphasis)

"Intelligent discontent is the mainspring of civilization." - Eugene V. Debs. Innovation does not survive in an environment of political correctness, for it's very nature tends to upset the apple cart. PC doesn't tolerate upsetting the apple cart.

"Political correctness is communal tyranny." - Phillip Atkinson, source.

We are demanding when it comes to our science; that is exactly how science works. Some of the most creative people I have ever met have also been the most rigorous with their methods. Imagination without rigor is just randomness and babbling. It is easy to dismiss that rigor and that demand for evidence and critical thinking by accussing others of a lack of imagination, but frankly, it is a tired, old, undemonstrated complaint.

I agree with you 100% on this statement. What I've observed in these forums, however, is adherence to political correctness in lieu of science. Not all the time, mind you. But some of the time, yes. True science always questions it's own conclusions, and allows for open discussion of the same.

Business is about getting people to give you money. Science is about accuracy and checking facts. They aren't just apples and oranges, they're apples and postgrad thesis.

In the business I was in, lack of facts and accuracy got you killed. No one died on my watch.

[Nereid]

We are demanding when it comes to our science; that is exactly how science works. Some of the most creative people I have ever met have also been the most rigorous with their methods. Imagination without rigor is just randomness and babbling. It is easy to dismiss that rigor and that demand for evidence and critical thinking by accussing others of a lack of imagination, but frankly, it is a tired, old, undemonstrated complaint.

I agree with you 100% on this statement. What I've observed in these forums, however, is adherence to political correctness in lieu of science. Not all the time, mind you. But some of the time, yes. True science always questions it's own conclusions, and allows for open discussion of the same.

(bold added)

Would you be kind enough to give some examples please?

[R.A.F.]

....it's painfully obvious any comment falling outside the box of political correctness gets unbelievably hammered by one or more mods who probably are scientists, but poor ones unwilling to think outside the box.

I'm with Swift on this...I don't see where "political correctness" has anything at all to do with what this board is about...perhaps you could clarify?

[R.A.F.]

It's not personal.

You insulted anyone who doesn't "think outside the box".

I never accused you of being close-minded.

So the "poor (scientists) who can't think outside the box" was a comment on our "openmindedness"? Really??

Political correctness is "a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, certain other religions, beliefs or ideologies, disability, and age-related contexts, and, as purported by the term, doing so to an excessive extent."

Still don't see the "connection", between that, and this board.

What I've observed in these forums, however, is adherence to political correctness in lieu of science. Not all the time, mind you. But some of the time, yes. True science always questions it's own conclusions, and allows for open discussion of the same.

You're gonna have to provide "examples" before I'll go further.

In the business I was in, lack of facts and accuracy got you killed.

Where is this "lack of facts/accuracy" on this board??


Examples, please...

[R.A.F.]

Personally, I like to think inside the box, because that's where all the evidence is. (big grin face)

[DoggerDan]

Would you be kind enough to give some examples please?

I'd be happy to respond to your request, Nereid. The way BAUT handles ATM issues is one example. Sure, the vast majority what's proposed there is absurd, conflicting with proven science. A few tidbits, however are intriguing. They get hammered with equal passion simply because they're ATM, instead of being properly discussed, as they should be. The way BAUT handles global warming is another example -- no open discussion there! While some of it is proven science, other aspects are not, so much so it's detractors don't have just one Wikipedia entry -- they have three (global warming controversy, global warming skepticism, and global warming conspiracy theory). The controversy article is extremely well-written, with a very large number of references (endnotes) -- 246 as of today. The accuracy of IPCC AR4 has been called into question (article and references), yet BAUT takes a very hard line against any discussion of it. Again, that's political correctness, not science. As I mentioned before, science invites discussion: "True science always questions it's own conclusions, and allows for open discussion of the same."

Hey folks, let's not derail this thread. I stand by the observations I shared in my post. I like IreneAnt's OP, and hope it comes to fruition. It won't happen in an oppressive environment, which seems to me to be common here on BAUT, as amply demonstration by how rapidly and forcefully my honest opinions were hammered in this thread alone, thereby proving my point. Case closed.

Now, if you would, let's please get back on topic. Thanks.

[R.A.F.]

They get hammered with equal passion simply because they're ATM, instead of being properly discussed, as they should be.

In other words, we challenge those ideas for which the evidence is poor/nonexistant.

Nothing "wrong" with that.



How would YOU "properly" discuss these topics?

[R.A.F.]

The way BAUT handles global warming is another example -- no open discussion there! While some of it is proven science, other aspects are not, so much so it's detractors don't have just one Wikipedia entry -- they have three.

Certainly you are not saying that because "detractors" have WIKI pages, that somehow has something to do with the validity of mainstream ideas regarding GW?

Naw....I must be misunderstanding what you mean...

[R.A.F.]

....as amply demonstration by how rapidly and forcefully my honest opinions were hammered in this thread alone, thereby proving my point. Case closed.

So you "declare victory", then you want to "close the case"?

[Nereid]

Thanks for the swift response, DoggerDan.

I'd be happy to respond to your request, Nereid. The way BAUT handles ATM issues is one example. Sure, the vast majority what's proposed there is absurd, conflicting with proven science. A few tidbits, however are intriguing. They get hammered with equal passion simply because they're ATM, instead of being properly discussed, as they should be.

There's a general comment to make here: the existence of the ATM section (and, to a lesser extent, the CT one) has a long history, and both previous owners - Phil Plait and Fraser Cain - several times wrote long posts on what they hoped (wished) it might achieve. Fraser also, after several years, put his foot down, very firmly, with regard to the way the ATM section was being used - cynically, coldly, deliberately - as a means of marketing certain crackpot ideas. The mods - and yes, I was one once - collectively had immense difficulty with that section. Consequently the special ATM rule - and its application - have been changed, many times.

How will the new owners treat the ATM section? We don't know, and are likely not to know for some time yet (there are many other things higher on their priority lists). Your concerns here may turn out to be moot (e.g. the ATM section may be axed entirely), or misdirected.

The same general comment applies to AGW.

Turning to the specifics: "... instead of being properly discussed, as they should be." (bold added)

Your comment seems to reflect an all too common misunderstanding of the ATM rules, as they currently stand. The ATM section is explicitly not about discussing ATM ideas! If you'd rather that the special ATM rule were modified, to permit collaboration on ATM ideas, or "proper discussion" of them (etc), then it would seem that your earlier comments are misguided, or misinformed (I'm being polite). In short, you can't fault BAUTians for acting in accord with an explicit rule, nor fault the mods for enforcing that explicit rule; rather, you should be advocating that the rule be changed!

Of course, if you were to take that stance, you'd be well-advised to check the history ... many before you have suggested, demanded, recommended, advocated, proposed, ... changing the ATM rule, to allow collaboration, "proper discussion", (and more).

The way BAUT handles global warming is another example -- no open discussion there! While some of it is proven science, other aspects are not, so much so it's detractors don't have just one Wikipedia entry -- they have three (global warming controversy, global warming skepticism, and global warming conspiracy theory). The controversy article is extremely well-written, with a very large number of references (endnotes) -- 246 as of today. The accuracy of IPCC AR4 has been called into question (article and references), yet BAUT takes a very hard line against any discussion of it.

Consistent, perhaps, with its clearly stated stance on AGW? As clearly explained by its (previous) owner, Fraser?

To me, this too seems like an example of your, um, misunderstanding of the actual rules, rather than a legitimate complaint about their application.

Again, that's political correctness, not science.

On this, I hope that you'll respect my right to disagree, strongly.

As I mentioned before, science invites discussion: "True science always questions it's own conclusions, and allows for open discussion of the same."

Quite.

I note, however, that you have been - up to now - totally silent on my first response to your post.

Hey folks, let's not derail this thread. I stand by the observations I shared in my post. I like IreneAnt's OP, and hope it comes to fruition. It won't happen in an oppressive environment, which seems to me to be common here on BAUT,

In this case, I look forward to your response to my post (this one), and, in particular, your concrete, specific suggestions/recommendations/proposals/etc concerning rule changes that would encode - in a manner that the mods can, realistically, act on - or align the noble ideals in the OP with your expectations concerning the conduct of science.

as amply demonstration by how rapidly and forcefully my honest opinions were hammered in this thread alone, thereby proving my point. Case closed.

I'm confused. Why do you think "honest opinions" should be exempt from being "hammered"? I mean, you seem to have no reluctance about "hammering" the "honest opinions" of plenty of other BAUTians, right? Or is it something about the content of your honest opinions that makes them immune from hammering? Maybe I've misunderstood your point, big time; if so, my apologies. I'd appreciate you setting me straight.