[sac-forum] Re: Beyond the NGC is Beyond the Pale
- From: AJ Crayon <acrayon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:17:33 -0700
Jack, speaking for Steve Coe and myself . . . thanks for such splendid
compliments [LOL].
For the relation between Best of the Beyond and 1000+ and all other observing
programs see the February and March issues of the SAC newsletter for 2000.
aj
Jack Jones wrote:
> After the FlatIron session, I concluded that the 'Best of the Beyond' is
> quite a curious bunch of objects. I don't know what was the point of the
> absolute SADISTS who compiled this list or what they were trying to prove,
> but I'm sure they enjoyed it immensely. Some few of the objects are
> ridiculously easy, but many more are excruciatingly and painfully difficult.
> Or as the euphemism goes, these are "Challlenge Objects" (hair-pullers,
> OK?). If you hate tiny starlike planetaries, you'll positively love to hate
> this list. Every strange object type in every weirdo catalog is represented
> here, each observation you make a #$%&# in itself. If you ever get thru this
> one you will be quite the well-rounded observer, and probably bald.
>
> I'm still hazy on 'Best of the Beyond the NGC' vs. the 1000+. I thought we
> agreed that the Best of the Beyond was disincluded from the 1000+, yet the
> website incorrectly lumps it with the other lists of those which can't be
> observed.
>
> Jack
Other related posts:
