Hmm, didn't Tammy state very clearly that this is in its essence a copied press release without any changes (and one where the glaring error still hasn't been corrected although the original source has long done so)? An "article" is something different, don't you think?

It would be most helpful if Universe Today would make it more obvious what is genuine new content (which I appreciate and often link to, actually, including a recent Tammy article) and what is a blindly copied press release! Sometimes the original source is linked to at the end – but not here …

I always read your stuff and see if I can glean some insights to what I'm trying to accomplish when I go observing.

You have my utmost admiration.

Oops… I'll correct it online but as you say the odds of many people [that's the science writers community I was talking about; DF] checking is slim… Thanks for letting me know.

Regards

Robert"

Case closed (while the issue of how science reporters should handle press releases has been taken care of in this CAP Journal article last fall).

Oh no, as a science journalist it is your duty to check press releases for accuracy – and correct them, esp. when they are so obvious as this one (of course I told the RAS, too). I thought Universe Today wanted to be something more than one of the countless copy&past press release mirror sites?

For the timeline of the Holmes outburst see the October 24 entry in my Cosmic Mirror and the "visual observation reports" links in the sidebar: By mid-day UTC on Oct. 24 tthe comet had already brightened by about a million.

"The 8 cameras that make up the system operate robotically, automatically scanning large areas of the sky each night."

To me, this sentence says the operation is controlled by a computer guided program on an agenda, not aimed on a whim.

"By coincidence, at 2339 GMT on the evening of 24 October 2007, it was pointing towards Comet 17P Holmes."

By coincidence means to me that it just happened to be pointing in that area at that time. Astronomers are rather picky about logging times.

"By the time SuperWASP spotted the comet, it had already brightened by a factor of 1000" explains Dr. Henry Hsieh. "But this was still almost 3 hours before anyone else noticed it."

Dr. Hsieh's comment leads me to believe the outburst was already occuring when the SW system began filming the area by coincidence. Since night doesn't happen at the same time all around the Earth, the news of the outburst was already breaking worldwide. I would say Dr. Hsieh comment that it "was still almost 3 hours before anyone noticed it." could either refer to the SuperWASP team monitoring the images, or "anyone" could also be a professional slip meaning other professional observatories.

As a reporter, it is not up to me to change dates or times on press releases – even if I believe them to be erroneous. Nor can I change statements given by others to make them read what we want them to say. As an accredited observer, if a professional observatory tells me their scope was pointed at X at 2339 GMT on the evening of 24 October 2007, then I must take that at face value.

If you feel their dates are in error, I would suggest you visit SuperWASP and explain that Dr. Hsieh's press release to the RAS is incorrect.

Daniel

I'm convinced.