We discussed the ISON ISOFF again nature of comet ISON in this WUWT thread, now it looks like ISOFF again.
From NASA’s Spaceweather.com (h/t Fernando): Comet ISON is fading fast as it recedes from the sun. Whatever piece of the comet survived the Thanksgiving flyby of the sun is now dissipating in a cloud of dust. (animation follows)
(Note: The animation may take a minute or more to load, based on your Internet connection speed.) Click to view a 3-day movie centered on perihelion (closest approach to the sun):
This development makes it unlikely that Comet ISON will put on a good show after it exits the glare of the sun in early December. Experienced astro-photographers might be able to capture the comet’s fading “ghost” in the pre-dawn sky, but a naked-eye spectacle can be ruled out.
On Nov. 29th, pilot Brian Whittaker tried to catch a first glimpse of Comet ISON from Earth, post-perihelion, from a plane flying 36,000 feet over the Arctic Circle in northern Canada. No luck:
“Ideal viewing conditions from the Arctic revealed no Comet ISON,” reports Whittaker. “This negative report is to quench the thirst of other fellow dreamers under cloudy skies or further south. Later I could see that SOHO showed the comet dimming further.”
Despite Whittaker’s negative result, it is too soon to rule out observations from Earth as the twice-dead comet moves away from the glare of the sun. Meanwhile, NASA’s fleet of solar observatory will be tracking the remains.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
thisisnotgoodtogo says:
December 12, 2013 at 2:11 pm
I’m ready to talk about the one legitimate part of a post that you have made.
You have disqualified yourself for further consideration. It is rare that that happens here.
French_Atkins, or others,
Would you be good enough to supply any other names involved other than Dr. Battams, if you’ve noticed any?
Thank you. I have Christmas shopping to do as well as this, so anything you can supply would be appreciated..
No, Dr. You have been an embarrassment to the scientific community, and honest exchange, and still are.
thisisnotgoodtogo says:
December 12, 2013 at 2:28 pm
No, Dr. You have been an embarrassment to the scientific community, and honest exchange, and still are.
Well, you are near the bottom of that slimy abyss, so perhaps you grace us with fewer spouts from the deep.
I’m no longer going to respond to Dr. Svalgaard’s antics.
Now it’s only about the reasonable part of a post he made.
He’s indicted Dr. Battams so far in exotic hype in hopes of gaining more funding.
thisisnotgoodtogo says:
December 12, 2013 at 2:45 pm
I’m no longer going to respond to Dr. Svalgaard’s antics.
Good riddance…
Should say ” indicted for”.
This is not to conclude that Dr. Svalgaard is correct in proposing that any scientist expressing confusion about ISON is overhyping own opinion.
Just to find other scientists who expressed confusion or were part of the team being spoken for.
Also to find other scientists who offered self-conflicting reports as time progressed. That indicates being confused by events, too.
One of the jobs will be to write to Dr. Battams and show him the post.
Anyone up for that?
lsvalgaard says:
December 12, 2013 at 1:03 pm
I guess that the final verdict is here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/12/from-agu-comet-isons-struggle-of-fire-and-ice/
No confusion, turmoil, befuddlement, etc…
———————
thanks Dr. S. lot of good info provided for anyone to learn about comets. But not that stuff where the guy keeps fighting with hisself..and uses you for a battering ram..cus he just can’t figure it out…or let it go………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Reposted from
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/12/from-agu-comet-isons-struggle-of-fire-and-ice/#comment-1499451
boris says:
December 12, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Excitement liberates funding, not to mention Media.
http://www.bellmediapr.ca/Network/Discovery/Press/A-Comet-For-the-Ages-Discoverys-HUNT-FOR-A-SUPER-COMET-Tracks-Comet-ISON-December-4-
Dr. Battams:
”
‘Schrödinger’s Comet
Submitted by Karl Battams on Thu, 11/28/2013 – 20:35
I’ll just say this upfront right now: whatever you read in the following blog post, please feel free to assume it is completely incorrect and the truth is actually quite contrary to what I’m saying. It has been – and continues to be – one of those days.
So this will be a relatively brief blog post because we’re up to our necks in media inquiries and attempting to do real science to figure out the mystery that is comet ISON, and Matthew and I are basically the only ones that have abandoned our loved ones on this US national Holiday and continued to work. Here’s what we know so far:
After impressing us yesterday, comet ISON faded dramatically overnight, and left us with a comet with no apparent nucleus in the SOHO/LASCO C2 images. As the comet plunged through the solar atmosphere, and failed to put on a show in the SDO images, we understandably concluded that ISON had succumbed to its passage and died a fiery death. Except it didn’t. Well, maybe…
After perihelion, a very faint smudge of dust appeared in the the LASCO C2 images along ISON’s orbit. This surprised us a little, but we have seen puffs of dust from Sungrazer tails, so it didn’t surprise us enormously and didn’t change our diagnosis. We watched and waited for that dust trail to fade away. Except it didn’t.
Now, in the latest LASCO C3 images, we are seeing something beginning to gradually brighten up again. One could almost be forgiven for thinking that there’s a comet in the images!
Matthew and I are ripping our hair out right now as we know that so many people in the public, the media and in science teams want to know what’s happened. We’d love to know that too! Right now, here’s our working hypothesis:[/quote]
So we have Dr.Battams saying ISON has been a mystery and it looks to be that his team is not in the position of thinking “nothing new here” that Dr. Svalgaard was in.
lsvalgaard says:
”
Reposted from
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/12/from-agu-comet-isons-struggle-of-fire-and-ice/#comment-1499451
boris says:
December 12, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Excitement liberates funding, not to mention Media.
http://www.bellmediapr.ca/Network/Discovery/Press/A-Comet-For-the-Ages-Discoverys-HUNT-FOR-A-SUPER-COMET-Tracks-Comet-ISON-December-4-”
I don’t see from that where anyone but boris says “Excitement liberates funding, not to mention Media.”
and I don’t see how Dr. Svalgaard could think posting that would enhance his position, or mean anything wrt to the discussion.
He’s merely reinforcing his statement about Dr. Battams, which stands there on it’s own already.
Dr. Svalgaard said
“You insinuate that scientists in general are in turmoil, while in reality it is just one scientist overhyping his own opinion. Science by press conference is often like that: To justify their funding [and beg for more], some scientists tend to claim that what they are seeing is unique, has never been seen before, overthrows long-held theories, leaves them befuddled, confused, stunned, etc.”
Here Dr. Svalgaard insinuates that not only is Dr. Battams trading on excitement, but that Dr. Battams was being untruthful in what he said in order to profit.
That’s a serious allegation to make against another scientist.
I find this a perfect and concise illustration of Dr. Svalgaard’s lack of legitimacy and truthfulness throughout.
Where I said one of his responses contained a legitimate attempt, he turned that into me saying it was illegitimate, that is, he said the reverse of the truth.
Here:
Me: “Now if Dr. Svalgaard wishes to dispute that confusion or turmoil occurred, that is a legitimate line to take. The rest are his bizarre antics.”
Dr.Svalgaard:”Telling you that no turmoil occurred is bizarre? Well, some people will never learn.”
Following up, instead admitting it, as an honest person would admit an error, he compounds it by making another untruthful statement.
Here:
“I strive to always be reasonable and certainly legitimate. So have, as a matter of course, been that all along.”
lsvalgaard says:
December 12, 2013 at 11:28 am
”
‘ thisisnotgoodtogo says:
December 12, 2013 at 11:15 am
Both #1 and #2 are now shown to have been presented on your demand.’
and you claim you didn’t know about them before I asked you to show them. I represent that you did, and that they were the reason for your question in the first place. That is what cherry picking is. But, if you profess total ignorance, then I can only recommend that you diligently study my replies and absorb the fact that ISON did not behave strangely at all.”
When it was shown that Dr. Svalgaard cherry picked the word “confused” from my question, and demanded to see that it had been used, and it was also shown that he demanded quotes in the first place. Then, instead of withdrawing his allegation of cherry picking, he changed tack, moved the goalposts to a different topic, and made a senseless allegation that I knew them before he asked.
Not only did he refuse to acknowledge the lack of substance to his cherry picking allegation, but he attempted to draw attention from that with allegations that I knew them prior to posting upon his demand.
Had I known #2 and used it as bait, it would not show anything material to the discussion. As it happened, by cherry picking that word, he only made himself show as not willing, for whatever reason, to simply and straightforwardly answer my question.