[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Public: Science news posts & Mediocrity
Amanda Baker wrote:
> Good morning, all!
> So, what do we, the subscribers to firstname.lastname@example.org, want the
> list to become?
Good morning to you, Amanda...
I thought I'd jot down some of the topics that have appeared
on various SETI Mailing Lists or Newsgroup posts which are
acceptable here, severely flamed there, or even successively
well-received and scornfully rejected on the same List. Rather
has the appearance of a Comedy of Errors or Commedia del'arte:
 The experimental procedures and instrumentation of SETI;
 The theoretical or hypothetical basis of SETI;
 Speculations concerning the nature of ET's and ETI;
 The editorial justification of SETI to the general public;
 Published references to SETI;
 The relationship of SETI to SETV;
 SETI search strategies other than RA or OSETI;
 The relationship of SETI to Exobiological Research;
 The relationship of SETI to Exoplanetary Research;
 Speculations concerning the probability of success;
 The history of belief in the plurality of inhabited worlds;
 Quotations to motivate and inspire the Quest;
 The putative psychological basis for SETI research;
 SETI and distributed computing; SETI@home.
 The History of Scientific SETI;
 Debates over On- and Off-topic posts.
In my opinion, what is needed is a decision or consensus on
the perspective to be adopted from which members view the
complex phenomenon called "SETI". A book published in l991
ought to be required reading for the discussion of this issue:
the title is "FIRST CONTACT The Search for Extraterrestrial
Intelligence" edited by Ben Bova and Byron Preiss and pub-
lished as a paperback by Plume (originally by Penguin). The
ISBN is 0-452-26645-9. This anthology contains articles by
major scientists and scientific journalists representing a
variety of viewpoints. Please check it out at your library.
Robert M. Owen
The Orion Institute
57 W. Morgan Street
Brevard, NC 28712-3659 USA