Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Astrologer Sues NASA Over Comet Probe

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the gotta-hate-when-that-happens dept.

0110011001110101 writes "NASA's mission that sent a space probe smashing into a comet raised more than cosmic dust -- it also brought a lawsuit from a Russian astrologer. 'Bai is seeking damages totaling $300 million -- the approximate equivalent of the mission's cost -- for her "moral sufferings," Izvestia said, citing her lawyer Alexander Molokhov. She earlier told the paper that the experiment would "deform her horoscope." ' "

5 of 999 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Her parents should be proud... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    That would be:

    In So...

    (don't forget capitalization... :)

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  2. Astrologers can't even carry out their own work by Jugalator · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    It's funny, astrologers keep working on things involving astronomic events, but they have no clue how physics work, not even enough knowledge to carry out their very own astrological work. It won't affect future locations of the comet, and since astrology is based on this, it won't affect astrology, but they don't get that. For all we know, they may very well strongly believe in that planets are huge spheres of cheese. :-p

    From Susan Kitchen's excellent Comet Bash coverage on the event:
    "This impact was the same as a flea/gnat hitting a 747 (i.e., not much). teeny tiny hundredth decimal place effect. Just not enough momentum exchange to move the comet at all."
    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  3. Re:The Russian court has got see reason, here. by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I think the only state to ban evolution was KS.

    I know I'm being literal here, but I love that sentence. It conjures up all sorts of ideas of what could happen if Kansas bans evolution, as opposed to banning the teaching of evolution. Wouldn't it be a sight if they could ban it retroactively?

  4. Re:The Russian court has got see reason, here. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I know I'm being literal here, but I love that sentence. It conjures up all sorts of ideas of what could happen if Kansas bans evolution, as opposed to banning the teaching of evolution. Wouldn't it be a sight if they could ban it retroactively?

    I know plenty of places in the Appalachians and in the south were they didn't wait for a state court to ban evolution...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  5. Re:The Russian court has got see reason, here. by lptport1 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    It's only one of your examples, but I'm sure if you looked into it further, the McDonald's coffee lawsuit got appealed. The fact that the person was awarded money at a lower court was highly publicized, while the appeal was not. And as an example of frivolous court cases getting thrown out, look to the case where someone tried to sue McDonald's because they became obese eating their food day in and day out, and felt McDonald's was in some way responsible for their ignorance of good dietary practice.

    I'm going to assume you're from the US, not only because your attention was captured for only a split second by the media coverage of how hot coffee can be, but also considering your choice of "i.e.", over "e.g." and other less notable errors in your comment.