If predictions are correct, the Quadrantid Meteor Shower will peak overnight tonight, at roughly 2 a.m. EST (11 p.m. tonight on the West Coast). To view this shower, find a dark (and safe) location with a clear view of the sky, dress warmly and face the Northeast. The radiant of this shower is roughly midway between Ursa Major (the Big Bear or Dipper) and Hercules. This area of the sky does not rise until about 11 p.m. local time, so for western observers, the radiant will be quite low at the predicted time of peak, and there will be a bright Moon in the sky (although in roughly the opposite quadrant). The Moon will set at roughly 3 a.m. local time, so more eastern observers (where the predicted peak comes at about 2 a.m. local time) are favored in that respect.

You must allow your eyes to adapt to the darkness for about 15 minutes before you can expect to see any meteors, so be patient. Meteor showers are notorious, not just because they are hard to predict in terms of the exact time, but also because their intensity can vary greatly from year to year. By some accounts, this year could provide a very good display of the Quadrantids. However, local lighting conditions, weather and the presence of a bright Moon all will affect what you see.

You can find more information on EarthSky: http://goo.gl/qJ0NC
and Spaceweather.com: http://goo.gl/alKe
and NASA: http://goo.gl/ycRHp

Of course, you are welcome to email me, but try to do so earlier enough for me to respond. I may be online only occasionally after about 6 p.m. MST tonight.

At any time there could be unpredictable events such as auroral displays. Please check the websites mentioned below and, again,  feel free to contact me at starman@usa.net.

Larry Sessions
Denver

P.S. For your planning purposes, the next significant meteor shower is the Lyrids, on the night of April 21-22. Also, I am compiling a list of significant events for the rest of the year, and I will let you know when that is finished.

P.P.S. My long time friend Kim Long has produced a wonderful resource called The 2012 Moon Almanac with everything you could want to know about the Moon, including a 2012 Moon Calendar Card showing all the phases of the Moon for the year. You can learn about the "Supermoon" on May 5, the "Blue Moon" on August 31, the eclipses in 2012 and much more. Kim is author of The Moon Book and has produced The Moon Calendar for years. Check it out here: The 2012 Moon Almanac.

---

Remember, "It's all over your head!"
Larry Sessions, Denver
Feel free to email your questions.

OK, there, I've written it and I will not take it back. Astrology is a crock, to be polite. It's right up there with reading tea leaves and sheep entrails to tell the future. Except for possible contributions of the "self-fulfilling prophecy" phenomenon, astrological predictions are about as accurate as pure chance. Astrologers claim that there is either a mystical force that science cannot examine, or else a physical force that has yet to be discovered that somehow affects the human psyche and personality. Yet the four well-known and highly investigated forces of nature have no such effects, and despite intensive investigations, no other forces have ever been discovered. There is simply no evidence that astrology works as claimed.

Many believers latch onto predictions that prove perfect through chance and hold them up as evidence of the truth of astrology, all the while ignoring the many more instances in which chance disproves the prediction. We humans have a large and undisciplined capacity to believe what we want to believe and ignore anything that contradicts it.

Years ago I read of a study synopsized here: "In 1979 Michel Gauquelin put an advertisement in Ici-Paris offering a free horoscope. Recipients were asked to reply saying how accurate they and their friends found the horoscope. Of the first 150 replies, 94% percent said it was accurate as did 90% of their friends and family. Unfortunately, they all got the same horoscope, that of Dr. Petiot, a notorious mass murderer." (from "What do you mean, 'test' astrology?", although I read of it originally in <em>Science and the Paranormal</em>, George O. Abell and Barry Singer, ed, Scribners, 1981).

Intrigued, I performed a similar experiment in one of my introductory college astronomy classes, distributing a horoscope to all students. Unfortunately I do not recall the exact numbers, but an impressive number of students, well above what would be expected by chance, felt that the horoscope was very accurate. And yet as in the example above, they all got the same horoscope, one as I recall for Ted Bundy the serial killer.

The bottom line is that astrology only seems to work because people want it to work. It is a very poor source of guidance, and can be a downright dangerous -- not to mention stupid -- way to order a human life.

But what really got me riled up here is the recent (Jan., 2011) media frenzy over the "new" astrological "sun signs." An article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune stated that the "sun signs" were off by about a month,  as if this trivial fact, well known to astronomers if not astrologers, for hundreds of years, was of any importance. Thus people who were born in early June, as I was, and who always thought that they were "Geminis," were suddenly thrown into turmoil to learn that in fact they are "Taurus's!" Oh, dear!

Astrological sun signs divide the year into 12 time periods named after the 12 constellations (more or less) through which the Sun passes during the year. Thus when these signs were conjured up two or three thousand years ago, the Sun was passing through Gemini in early June. Hence people born in early June were known as "Geminis," and were though to have all the traits and foibles incumbent on that sign.

However, a very slow wobble ("precession") of the Earth's rotational axis causes the Sun's apparent position among the stars to drift through the millenia. Whereas when the astrological sun signs were devised, they at least represented an astronomical fact -- the Sun indeed did pass through Gemini in early June. However, today the Sun's apparent position has shifted and it appears in the direction of Taurus in early June.

This is not news. Astronomers have known about precession (or"Precession of the Equinoxes") at least since the time of Aristarchus of Samos in 280 BC. The Sun slipped from Gemini into Taurus (with similar shifts throughout the year) hundreds of years ago, and astronomers knew it, but they also knew that it had no importance except in slightly and slowly shifting what constellations were visible in the night sky. Astrologers, who imputed much more importance to the positioning of the Sun and stars, apparently missed or discounted this fact (although some did realize it but did nothing to adjust thier prognostications).

When this story showed up in the Star Tribune, it was a bit like reporting the end of the Revolutionary War. Not news, and not important. But what really annoyed me was how the media picked up this bit of pseudo news and -- ignoring input by the astronomer who brought it up in the first place that there was no mystical connection between the Sun, stars and Earth -- blew it across the planet with the importance of the Second Coming... or maybe just the importance of a confirmed alien landing.

It is not so much the falseness of astrology that bothers me here, but gullibility and irrationality of the public, and the failure of the media to know what is news and what is important.

We need more clear thinking, more rationality and less cow-herd mentality.

Tweet

I just saw the new True Grit this afternoon. It was wonderful. Absolutely classic. Odd, however, that they filmed in in New Mexico and Texas, but vastly more appropriate than the first one, which I always through was filmed in Oregon. Anyway, much as I loved John Wayne, I could never warm up to the first version. This one was one of the best westerns, maybe one the best films overall, that I have ever seen. You may not agree, but I was moved. REALLY LOVED IT.

Jeff Bridges was the perfect Rooster, and the girl who played Mattie was superb -- she even got cuter as the movie when on (to me, anyway). As I remember, Charles Portis wrote this while serving as a librarian in the Little Rock Public library, back while I was in high school. If that is true, I likely saw him many times, but had no idea who he was. Unlike many other movies and TV shows, it left a good and proud -- and probably very realistic to the times -- impression of my home state, and I endorse it fully. There's a little violence and blood, and a bit of cussing, but nothing that most intelligent kids can't take. No gratuitous (or otherwise) sex. I makes fun of Texas (although I also love Texas to the bone), but the Texas Ranger comes through admirably in the end, as in the novel. Normally I do *NOT* make recommendations, but I strongly suggest that you see this movie. Although I have swore off buying movies, I may have to have a copy of this one, to go up on the shelf with The Day the Earth Stood Still (original) 2001, Starman and Dances with Wolves.

December 20-21 -- Since this event is widely viewable across North America and no special equipment is involved, you don't really need any instructions. Just dress warmly and be safe. Since this will be high in the sky for most observers, a chaise lounge or some way to lie down is a good idea. It's also always a good idea to observe with a friend. Otherwise, just go out at the right time for you time zone and look up. The Moon will be between Taurus and Gemini, high to the South. Although the exact coloration or brightness cannot be predicted accurately, in most cases a completely eclipsed Moon is orangish, occasionally dark gray or even brick red. Only on rare occasions is it so dark as to be difficult to see. That's all you really need to know. Here is a table with the times for North America:

Dec. 20-21, 2010	UT	NST	AST	EST	CST	MST	PST	AlST	HAST
Penumbral eclipse starts	5:29	2:29	1:29	0:29	23:29	22:29	21:29	20:29	19:29	Faint outer shadow, hard to see
Partial eclipse starts	6:33	3:33	2:33	1:33	0:33	23:33	22:33	21:33	20:33	First "bite" of the darker umbral shadow appears
Totality starts	7:41	4:41	3:41	2:41	1:41	0:41	23:41	22:41	21:41	Moon completely covered by Earth’s umbral shadow
Mid-totality	8:18	5:18	4:18	3:18	2:18	1:18	0:18	23:18	22:18	Best
Totality ends	8:53	5:53	4:53	3:53	2:53	1:53	0:53	23:53	22:53	Totality over, partial phase returns
Partial eclipse ends	10:01	7:01	6:01	5:01	4:01	3:01	2:01	1:01	0:01	Last of umbral shadow gone, eclipse effectively over
Penumbral eclipse ends	11:05	8:05	7:05	6:05	5:05	4:05	3:05	2:05	1:05	End of penumbral phase, hard to see

(The time zones in this table are Universal Time, plus Newfoundland, Atlantic, Eastern, Central, Mountain, Pacific, Alaskan and Hawaii-Aleutian Standard Times. Times are in the 24-hour format, and those in the blue shaded area are on the evening of December 20, whereas all others are on December 21.)

You may also want to read this article on EarthSky: Total Lunar Eclipse for the Americas, and this NASA page: Solstice Lunar Eclipse. You also can find more information on this NASA Eclipse Page. There also will be more information on EarthSky and my North American Skies Twitter page.

December Solstice

December 21 -- The December Solstice, marking the Sun's lowest midday  appearance of the year, and the official beginning of Winter for the Northern Hemisphere, occurs at precisely 6:38 p.m. EST on Tuesday, December 21. (That's 5:38 p.m. Central, 4:38 p.m. Mountain, and 3:38 p.m. Pacific Standard Time).

Just this week, astronomers announced that the total number of stars in the Universe may well be 3 times what we had thought up to this time. In 1997, I wrote a piece about the probable number of stars in the entire Universe, based on information available at that time. The original article is copied below, but be sure to read the additional material at the end:

---

On the Shores of the Cosmic Ocean

So I decided to find out. Obviously I couldn't count all the sand grains, but I could do an order of magnitude calculation. Of course, sand comes in a variety of sizes. One standard definition is that medium sand is 0.25 to 0.5 millimeters in diameter, and fine sand is 0.25 to 0.125 millimeters. I chose, arbitrarily, to consider sand grains of 0.25 millimeters as an average. To further simplify matters I considered that each sand grain is a perfect cube, which allows for efficient packing.

In my astronomy classes I have often used the claim that there are "more stars in the heavens than all the grains of sand on all the beaches on Earth." The claim is certainly not original with me, but I had always accepted it without question. Then one day began to wonder if it is really true. After all, there must be a really big number of sand grains on all the planet's beaches! Now all I had left to do was determine the volume of all the Earth's beaches! Simple, right?

Whoa, not really! First off, the best estimate I could find is that there are about a million and a half kilometers of shorelines on Earth. Not all of them have beaches per se, and some that do, have only very short beaches. Rather than stack the deck against the stars, I estimated that all the Earth's shorelines had a beach 50 meters back from the water. On the average, this may be an exaggeration. Next, how deep do you consider the beach to be? What is the definition? Who knows? A meter is about as deep as any summer beachcomber would ever dig, so I finally decided on that figure as the depth.

So, what is the number of sand grains, 0.25 millimeters cubed, that will fit in 1.5 million kilometers of beach, 50 meters broad and a meter deep? You can do the math yourself, or just accept my answer:

4.8 x 10²¹

That's 4,800,000,000,000,000,000,000! Thus there is likely to be something less than 5 thousand billion billion grains of sand on the Earth's beaches! If I had just a penny for every billion grains of sand, I would be the world's richest person with nearly 50 billion dollars!

OK, this must be far more than all the stars in the sky, right? Let's see.

Until recently, the total number of galaxies in the Universe was estimated to be about 10 billion. However, the Hubble Space Telescope has provided a much clearer view of the Cosmos, and today's estimate is that there are 50 billion galaxies. Generally speaking, our Milky Way can be considered fairly average with the mass equivalent to 100 billion stars. There certainly can be some argument here that not all of a galaxy's mass is in the form of stars. There may be super-massive black holes in their cores, as well as other unseen matter. Nevertheless I think it is legitimate to consider the Milky Way our yardstick here.

So 50 billion galaxies all roughly equivalent to the Milky Way (100 billion stars) amount to aboutr how many stars altogether?

5 X 10²¹

That's still slightly more than all the grains of sand on Earth's beaches (even considering my rather generous assessment of shoreline fill). How many more? Oh, about 200 billion billion more stars than grains of sand. But of course, this is just an estimate. Still the old cliché seems vindicated. All of a sudden I'm really beginning to feel small and very insignificant!
 

---

That was 1997.Several eyars later a revised estimate based on new Hulbble data quadrupled the number of galaxies to about 200 billion, and several years after that the figure was doubled again. The newly released estimates, based on new ideas about the smallest of stars (red dwarfs), indicate that the total count estimate has been woefully inadequate. If true, there are about 3 times 10²³ stars in the Universe, which is about two orders of magnitude (roughly 100 times) more stars than I estimated in 1997. There are truly no good words for this, but "staggering" and "stupifying" are our best choices.

Larry Sessions
http://twitter.com/NASkies
 

August 10, 2010

I wrote and published the following piece for a newsletter was doing years ago and then subsequently it ran on my blog at EarthSky.org. Since that blog entry is no longer available (although my blog at EarthSky is still available!), I’m posting it here again unedited from its original form. I should point out that this year (2010), the Perseids are predicted to peak at about 12 a.m. (midnight) UT on August 13, which puts it in the early evening on the 12th for North America. This is not perfect timing, since it won’t even be full dark through most of the continent at the actual time of peak (better for Europe). In fact the radiant point in Perseus doesn’t even rise over the northeastern horizon until late evening. Therefore, the best time to view likely will be before dawn on the 12th and, possibly better, between midnight and dawn on the 13th. Again, please note that the specific references to the shower in the year 1996 are outdated. And now, the original article:

 Of Meteors and Mummified Heads
The Perseid Meteor Shower

by Larry Sessions, North American Skies newsletter
http://home.comcast.net/%7Esternmann/index.htm
http://twitter.com/NASkies

As you may have heard, the early centuries of this Era were not always pleasant for Christian believers and especially not the clergy. One such unfortunate soul was Saint Laurence patron saint of Archivists, Librarians, Comedians, Cooks, Brewers, Students, Launderers, Confectioners, and Cutlers.

Laurence, one of the seven deacons of Rome at the time, was probably feeling a bit uneasy when Emperor Valerian ordered Pope Sixtus II and four of his deacons beheaded on one day, followed by two more deacons on the following day. But when the prefect of Rome ordered Laurence to surrender the Church's treasures, Laurence evidently felt that he had nothing to lose. He would die anyway, so he chose to go out with a statement of faith and defiance. According to tradition, when he appeared before the Roman officials he brought along a number of the City's poor, lame and infirm, proclaiming that "These are the treasure of the Church!"

Evidently the Roman authorities failed to appreciate Laurence's point, and decided to execute him. The most frequently quoted story is that he was strapped to a large gridiron -- a metal framework faintly resembling the shape of a modern football field and used much like a rotisserie -- and barbecued somewhat past well done. However, modern belief is that he was beheaded just as were the other Church officials.

This was August 10, A.D. 258. At approximately the same time, the Perseid Meteor Shower was near its peak (although it wasn't called the Perseids at the time and oriental records indicate that the peak may have come earlier). The faithful who remained after their Church hierarchy had been executed may have noted the fiery streaks across the night sky. These "shooting stars" must have appeared more like blazing tears, because the annual celestial downpour later became known as "Saint Laurence's Tears." Today the Church recognizes August 10 as a feast day for Saint Laurence. Whether the early Christians actually saw this at the time of Laurence's death is questionable, and the association is likely a later one.

But what about that "mummified head?" As mentioned above, most modern scholars think that Saint Laurence was beheaded rather than burned. We could not confirm this, and it certainly isn't on any ordinary tourist's must see agenda, but there are some who believe that the martyred Saint's mummified head may be on display in the Vatican's secret archives.

The Meteor Shower

Well, we may never know for sure about the Saint's desiccated remains, but we can say with some certainly that the "Tears of Saint Laurence," otherwise known as the Perseid Meteor Shower, will reappear this year, just as it has for untold centuries. The first recorded observation of this shower was by Chinese astronomers in A.D. 36, when it apparently occurred in July. It wasn't documented again until the 8th Century, and after that the oriental records are plentiful. In Europe, the first documented records aside from the possibly apocryphal story about Saint Laurence didn't come until the 9th Century.

In 1862, a comet known as P/Swift Tuttle was discovered, and subsequently the Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli, the same Schiaparelli of Martian Canal infamy, deduced that the comet and the meteor shower were related.

In fact, the meteors are particles distributed along the comet's orbit. Each year the Earth passes across the orbit of the comet, which appears to lie in the direction of the constellation Perseus, hence the name. For several weeks during this time the fragments crash into the Earth's atmosphere, heating to incandescence through friction with air molecules. Though certainly not the fastest of meteors, the Perseids rip through the upper atmosphere at about 135,000 miles per hour.

Comet Swift Tuttle (named for its discoverers Lewis Swift and Horace Tuttle) orbits the sun about once every 128 years. It last rounded the sun in 1992, and while the number of meteors have been on the rise, the expected huge increase has yet to arrive. There have been brief periods of greater than normal spurts, but no massive storm. This shower is known for a relatively large number of bright meteors. Optimistically, a single observer under very clear, dark skies and at the time of maximum, may see anywhere between 50 and 100 meteors per hour.

This Year 1996

While anything is possible, it is unlikely that this year will be unusual. But because there will be no bright Moon in the late night/early morning sky to interfere, observing prospects for this year's display are good. The Perseids are traditionally the best and most reliable shower of the year, occasionally outdone only by the December Geminids and very rarely by other lesser known showers.

So when and where should you look? There are various estimates on the exact time of the peak. Sky & Telescope magazine predicts 12 hours Universal on August 12. That's 8 a.m. Eastern, 7 a.m. Central, 6 a.m. Mountain, and 5 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time on the 12th. Also according to S&T, there may be a new peak, evidenced in displays over the past few years, that will occur about 12 hours earlier. Astronomy Magazine's Observer's Guide 1996 predicts 9.6 hours Universal (3:36 a.m. Mountain Daylight Time) on the 12th. The source I use most frequently is the Observer's Handbook of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. It concurs with the prediction of 12 hours Universal on the 12th.

So at any rate, your best viewing this year is likely to come in the near moonless few hours just before daybreak on Monday, August 12. Although the meteors may seem to shoot across much of the sky, they radiate from Perseus, which will be high in the north to northeastern sky before dawn.

Of course, you should be in a clear, dark location away from the city. Observations are greatly facilitated if you are appropriately dressed and prepared from nighttime nasties such as mosquitoes. To avoid backache and neck strain, you also will need a comfortable place to lie down or at least recline partially. Chaise longues are great.

If you follow these guidelines and are blessed with cloudless skies, you should see a good display. First time observers should note, however, that the term "shower" is used loosely in this context. A really good meteor shower is one with one "drop" per minute.

May Saint Laurence's Tears this year be tears of joy!

* * *

copyright 2010 by Final Copy, Inc.

original copyright 1996 by Final Copy, Inc.
(Reprinting or other redistribution, with proper credit including URL, is permitted and encouraged.)

(For the MARS HOAX, see the previous blog below.)

One thing that interests me are myths and misconceptions. They often lower our intelligence by tempting us not to think, urging us instead to accept the authority of something we once read, or the proclamation of someone older and presumably wiser than we are. Unfortunately, the word, whether written or spoken, is not always correct and is frequently colored with misunderstanding and sometimes deliberate untruths. Sometimes people believe strange or ignorant things because they want to, perhaps because to understand and accept the truth topple their whole world-view or just make them look stupid. But I think in most cases, people believe myths and misconceptions because that is what their parents or others in authority have told them, or they just haven’t bothered to look beyond the end of their noses.

Myths and misconceptions are especially prevalent in the public’s beliefs about space and astronomy. Many students quite literally have conceptions of the heavens and our place in the universe no more advanced than those prevalent in the middle ages. Many students do not realize that the stars appear to move across the sky at night, and many think that the Sun stands directly overhead at noon (which is never true in the US, Canada, Europe or anywhere for that matter except the equatorial regions). I’ll have to write a blog or maybe a book someday on that topic.

But we also have myths and misconceptions on many other topics, not the least of which has to do with animals. We hear stories of animal abuse and neglect all the time. Frequently here in Colorado it has to do with horses or other ranch animals, but certainly there are plenty of sad stories about domestic animals such as dogs and cats, as well as exotics that some moron has brought into the country. Just today I read a story online about a father and son accused of abusing, starving and otherwise neglecting some 35 animals: horses, sheep, cows and a goat. All were emaciated, and some were said to be diseased and in such sad shape that these still living creatures were literally “in various stages of decomposition.”

Having read this article in horror and disgust, I read some of the comments left by other readers. Frankly, most were also horrified and disgusted, but there also were those who had the attitude that “animals are just animals,” so why be concerned about it? The comment that most annoyed me, however, was the one that implied that people who care about animals do not care about children and infants. Here is my reply:

Anyone who says that animal lovers don't care about infants and children simply doesn't know their head from a hole in the ground (to put it civilly). That sentiment is absolutely not true. People have this idea, fostered by cultural traditions and mythology, that animals are somehow less aware of pain and suffering, just because they are not as highly evolved as humans or were "created" in a lower state than humans. That's just the smelly stuff on Ken Buck's boots. Anyone who has spent any conscious moment caring for animals knows that they do, indeed, feel and they do suffer.

People love animals for exactly the same reasons they love infants and children, and animal lovers in general are just as concerned for the welfare of humans as animals. I know many who love and care for animals, myself included, and that is the way they all think. I resent the accusation that they feel otherwise. All living creatures (including those raised for food) deserve good and humane treatment. And that includes humans as well. There are extremists on both sides of the fence, but that is true in just about everything these days, and stupidity abounds. Extremists should not be your model for the mainstream. Don't let personal prejudices tempt you to condemn people who are caring and considerate of all life, just because of personal misconceptions.

What many animal lovers do say is that animals deserve to be treated well just as much as humans do, and with that I heartily agree. Accuse me of that, if you want, but to say or imply that I or other animal lovers would put up with baby murderers or pedophiles is both offensive and ignorant.

I think people need to start thinking for themselves, and stop just hocking up old loogies of misconceptions from what they have read or heard. Find out what your prejudices and investigate them. Sometimes they may be founded in truth, but other they are not. Animals feel, animals suffer. And people who care about animals also care about children and infants just as much.

Way back in 2003, something interesting happened. not earth-shattering, not life-changing, but interesting. On August 27th of that year, Mars ventured closer to Earth than every had before in all recorded history, about 56 million kilometers (just less than 35 million miles). An unusual event, surely, but in fact it was only a few hundred thousand miles closer than it normally gets every few decades. Compared to the average distance to Mars, thats just a fraction of a percent closer than at many, many other times.

In other words, it was a notable event, but hardly spectacular. Mars was bright that night, as it was weeks before and after. It was a tiny, bright dot of light in the constellation Aquarius. As I recall the actual moment of closest approach was in the wee hours before dawn, and I was with a group of people at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. I think we gave Mars around of applause as the special moment arrived, and then we all went home for an hour or two of sleep.

Mars did not appear as big and bright as the Full Moon. Not by a long, long shot. It appeared as a pinpoint of light, brighter than any of the stars in its general vicinity, but far fainter than the Full Moon. In fact, by my calculation, Mars was nearly 9000 times fainter than the Full Moon (which, by the way, was not in the sky at the time). I can't give you a precise analogy, but you might imagine that such a comparison is a little like comparing a small flashlight to the landing light on a 747.

And as for size, there was no comparison. Mars appeared only as a bright pinpoint dot.

Now, someone with little knowledge of astronomy put together an overblown, sensational email complete with a handful of idle facts and a boatload of misinterpretations and distortions about what was really going to happen. We don't know who sent out the original email, but it quickly went viral and spread far and wide. Unsuspecting recipients, excited to share what they thought was going to be a spectacular, once-in-a-lifetime event, forwarded it on to all their friends, who in turn forwarded it on to their friends, and... well, you get the picture. The whole thing snowballed, as so many things do on the Internet do. But it didn't stop when Mars failed to live up to the preposterous claims of the email. Instead, the next year someone rolled it out again. And then the next year. And the next. It is still bouncing around the Internet today, sometimes with the few facts deleted in favor of the moronic distortions. Variations, including the one I received this year, include Powerpoint presentations.

If you examine the original email closely, it contains some good facts, but it greatly over emphasizes their significance and rarity. The original email claimed that Mars would appear as big as the Full Moon, but few realize that it also said that you would have to have a 75 power telescope to see it that way. It did not mention that to the naked eye it would be just a small dot. Anyway, the whole thing points up that many of us are too trustful of what we read and what we see on the Internet, and it shows that the average American is woefully misinformed about astronomy and our place in the Universe. As an astronomy instructor, I encounter this all the time and it is pretty sad. In some ways, modern Americans don't understand astronomy any better than our counterparts in the Middle Ages. We hold many misconceptions, believe many distortions, and pass on completely erroneous information, most of the time without questioning anything.

But you can help by setting folks straight about this Mars email. Let people know that it is misleading and in fact referred, if erroneously, to an event in 2003, not 2010. Remind them that there are places they can get good information, including

NASA    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/09jun_marshoax/
EarthSky    http://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/will-mars-appear-as-large-as-a-full-moon-in-august-2010
Snopes    http://www.snopes.com/science/astronomy/brightmars.asp

Why not pass on my own Powerpoint about the Mars hoax, and urge all your friends to forward it to all their friends. Maybe it will go viral, too. Let's spread some real science rather than distortions and pseudoscience!

(Click here to download my small self-running (exe) presentation: Mars_in_August

I've learned that hundreds of UFO enthusiasts will converge in Denver on July 22-25 for the 41st International UFO symposium. Oh, joy. I don't want to be unfairly harsh, but I don't want Denver to vie with Portland, which I have heard is considered America's weirdest city. Frankly, I don't know if Portland is truly deserving of such a title, as I have personally never been there. The bottom line is that I do not want Denver to be considered a Mecca for fringe elements, conspiracy theorists, or proponents of pseudoscience.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think there is a legitimate field of study here, just as worthwhile as ghost-hunting, fortune-telling, and phrenology. There is a genuine phenomenon worth further study. But fear that it has more to do with abnormal psychology than with alien intelligence.

But more than that, there are some genuinely intelligent and sincere researchers in all these areas and more. There are UFO enthusiasts I have known and paranormal researchers here in Denver who deserve respect, but as far as I am concerned, none of them has any legitimate evidence of alien visitations or visitors from beyond the grave. I would be foolish to claim that such is absolutely impossible, but I would be equally foolish to believe that any of the stories and claims put forth by UFO enthusiasts, ghost hunters or psychic “researchers” have any validity without any proper evidence.

But who knows? Maybe someday some good evidence will come out, but so far all we have are easily distorted or even fabricated stories, questionable photos, misinterpretations of natural or manmade objects or events. There are, however, a small number of unexplained sightings, photos and videos, but just because they are currently unexplained does not mean that they represent alien visitations.

I will adopt the convention of referring to the more reasonable and rational investigators into UFO and other pseudo science phenomena as “enthusiasts.” On the other hand, for those who are unabashed “the-aliens-are-here-and-I-know-it-cause-I-seen-em” advocates, I will use the term, “peckerheads” from now on.

Let me clarify my term here a little. I know that “peckerhead” has a certain meaning in urban slang, and while I suspect that it does indeed apply in many UFO cases, my definition is a bit different. For my use here, “peckerhead” shall refer to anyone who knowingly, actively and unashamedly promotes any form of unsubstantiated pseudoscience, including but not limited to UFOs, Bigfoot, chupacabra, ghosts, fairies, and various forms of so-called paranormal and psychic phenomena.

As I indicated above, not all UFO enthusiasts are peckerheads. Not at all. I am a UFO enthusiast because I find the whole topic interesting and although I have never seen any evidence that would make me a “true” believer, no one would be more pleased for a UFO to land on the Whitehouse lawn with a crew of friendly little green men. NO, by “peckerhead” I refer to those who deliberately spread the propaganda of pseudoscience, who uncritically accept unsubstantiated claims as fact, who foster a paranoia and distrust of science, and/or who often distort or even fabricate reports or evidence to support their positions. They may do this for monetary profit or just for personal attention and ego. Unfortunately, there are far too many peckerheads in the world today.

On top of this, certain alien visitation proponents have managed to get an initiative on the ballot so that Denver voters must decide whether the city will devote time and resources to a city sanctioned Extraterrestrial Affairs Commission. The promoters claim that Denver needs to be ready to assure citizen's safety in the event that aliens show up. What that means is unclear. Whether it is to be sure the people of Denver aren't duped by alien Ponzi schemes or zapped laser weapons of mass destruction is not known.

In any event, I am banking on the intelligence of Denver's people to vote this insanity down. Otherwise I may just have to move to Portland.

There are lots of ways to keep track of satellites that pass over your area. Probably the most comprehensive is "Heavens Above," where you can get predictions for the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station (ISS), the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), Iridium satellites and more. NASA also has a great service that provides you with Sighting Opportunities. For simplicity, you can't beat Spaceweather.com's Satellite Flybys. Just enter your Zip or Postal Code (US and Canada) and you get a neat list of the major flybys over the next week or so, including the ISS, HST, Space Shuttle (when in orbit, of course), several spy satellites and even the errant "ISS tool bag." There also is a version for use outside of the US and Canada.

But without question, the most consistently bright and easy to spot object is the ISS. Earlier this week I observed it on a pre-dawn passage during which it flared to several times the brightness of Venus, which also was in the sky at the time. It was stunning. You can get predictions for the ISS, of course, from the services already mentioned, but one unique, effective and very easy to use service is called Twisst. You have to have a (free) Twitter account (and your profile needs to have your location as accurately as possible). Then you just "follow" the Twisst Twitter site and they keep track of the ISS passages and "message" you when a passage will soon occur. You can monitor this by checking your "#replies" page on Twitter.

Better yet, Twisst actually makes a special page for you online that you can check for the next passage. Here is my page, which I have set up for my Twitter account of "Denver Skies": http://twisst.nl/6760.

(Actually, I use a great little program called "WebMon" that monitors that page on whatever schedule I choose, and automatically notifies me online when it is updated.)

Currently, Twisst provides only the basic information on ISS passages (but certainly enough information to make it very useful), using information provided by Heavens Above. Perhaps as the user base grows, they will add other objects and information. Give Twisst a try!