Re: ATMJ help

[Mel Bartels <mbartels@efn.org>]

First of all I know of no studies published in peer reviewed magazines that show
that atm'ing is dying out or indeed is doing anything.

Secondly, what is meant by 'dying out'?  A decrease in raw numbers?  A decrease
in innovation?  A decrease in the complexity of the average atm project?  What
is really meant here?

(I've not received my S&T yet, but...) Using the charitable argument, I state
the proposition of "atm'ing dying out" to be the decline of atm'ing to the
extent that it ceases to be a significant part of amateur astronomy.

I assert that this argument has achieved the status of an urban legend, casually
oft repeated with little thought as to its basis, to the point where most
amateurs nod sagely when hearing this.

I cannot offer much solid evidence that atm'ing is not dying out, but then it is
not incumbent upon me to do so, that is, to prove the negative.  Those who
believe need to offer evidence to advance their position.

I can suggest some personal anecdotal evidence, that the local clubs I know of
have continued strong atm'ing groups, that new club members continue to join the
atm'ing rank (Eugene and Portland all have active mirror making groups mainly
comprised of newer members), that atm'ing continues to progress with as many new
twists and innovations and real improvements as was found in the 50's, 60's,
70's, and 80's, that the most complex atm projects are as complex if not more so
than in the past.  It is my impression that the total amount of amateur glass at
major star parties is increasing.  Indeed, thanks to the internet and to
computers, atm's future is assured to be a rich and varied if not chaotic one.

I too once believed that atm'ing was dying out, but seeing what has been
happening at major pacific northwest coast star parties these past couple of
years has changed my mind.  Atm'ing is changing - let's not mistake that for
dying out.  In fact, similar hobbies (those that have strong 'build it yourself'
or 'do it yourself' components) are changing in similar ways.

Interestingly, the aavso discussion group is debating the merits of visual vs
digital imaging for star magnitude estimates.  Lots of emotion, lots of opinion,
not too much fact.  We invest much of ourselves in the ways we learned to enjoy
our hobby.  Just because the hobby is changing, let's not say that it is dying
out (read: our way of doing it is losing popularity), and let's not judge one
another's 'wow' or 'bang' out of the hobby just because they get their kicks a
little differently than we do.

What do you guys and gals think???

--
Clear skies, Mel Bartels
http://www.efn.org/~mbartels