Because the name is for use by astronomy, hence INTERNATIONAL ASTRONOMICAL UNION. These are not legal names. You can call it anything you want, but when the scientists are talking to each other, if you don't care for it, then it doesn't concern you. It's the fact that you and the others seemingly refuse to accept this fact that makes this JAQing off.
And I was making the point that Western scientific convention likes Latin names. The IAU is a scientific body that assigns names for scientific purposes. You are free to continue to use english names for every day communications. But in science, people need to know if you're using a colloquial term or an actual term. Stop turning this into a culture war.
There's no "rights". The IAU is not a legal body, it's a scientific body that, among other things, assigns official names so that astronomers have a internationally accepted name by which to refer things so other scientists can also refer to.
My answer covered all those grounds either implicitly or explicitly. There's no policy of forced Latinization. Latinization is a purely a Western science convention. I gave those answers and they weren't accepted.
Whether or not they were patronising is irrelevant.
Calling someone out for using "just asking questions" is not an ad hominem attack. Nowhere did I say his arguments were invalidated by his tactics.
Just because I didn't comment on your name calling didn't mean I didn't spot it. That's what people should normally do when encountering ad hominem attacks that has absolutely no bearing on arguments. I know people like you love the comeback argument style of Jerry Springer, but the rest of us have standards.
Because you have to start somewhere. Americans copied before innovating. The British copied before innovating. Copying is always the first step. No person or country starts innovating without copying others first. That's how humans learn.
Who said they didn't accept the english? Maybe it was submitted in its Latin form, since science related names in the West is latinized? Why are you so offended?
You can call it a Latin name if you want. You would be surprised to learn that other countries with their own language even have a different word than "Moon" to refer to the Moon!
Exactly right. Now matter HOW they achieve this. Innovation does not occur predictably. The "any way will do" attitude is what allows innovation to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Send his ashes to Mars.
Because the name is for use by astronomy, hence INTERNATIONAL ASTRONOMICAL UNION. These are not legal names. You can call it anything you want, but when the scientists are talking to each other, if you don't care for it, then it doesn't concern you. It's the fact that you and the others seemingly refuse to accept this fact that makes this JAQing off.
Because they have no scientific use.
And I was making the point that Western scientific convention likes Latin names. The IAU is a scientific body that assigns names for scientific purposes. You are free to continue to use english names for every day communications. But in science, people need to know if you're using a colloquial term or an actual term. Stop turning this into a culture war.
It wasn't a legitimate question, just like none of the other whines about "how come we don't get to keep the english name" loaded questions were.
No one claimed it was good either. They were just explaining that that action could be seen as consistent in theory, which is technically true.
There's no "rights". The IAU is not a legal body, it's a scientific body that, among other things, assigns official names so that astronomers have a internationally accepted name by which to refer things so other scientists can also refer to.
There's more than one way to state answers. This isn't primary school.
Latin naming is a Western scientific convention and perceived as having gravitas. Stop playing the victim.
My answer covered all those grounds either implicitly or explicitly. There's no policy of forced Latinization. Latinization is a purely a Western science convention. I gave those answers and they weren't accepted.
Whether or not they were patronising is irrelevant.
When no answer given is good enough and the question is repeated with no counter-evidence or counter-argument.
If bothered reading the whole thread, you'd see that I did answer the question. He kept asking, at which point, it became a red flag.
Calling someone out for using "just asking questions" is not an ad hominem attack. Nowhere did I say his arguments were invalidated by his tactics.
Just because I didn't comment on your name calling didn't mean I didn't spot it. That's what people should normally do when encountering ad hominem attacks that has absolutely no bearing on arguments. I know people like you love the comeback argument style of Jerry Springer, but the rest of us have standards.
Oh, I guess that ad hominem logic (or maybe genetic fallacy?) completely invalidates the idea that "just asking questions" is a debate tactic.
Because you have to start somewhere. Americans copied before innovating. The British copied before innovating. Copying is always the first step. No person or country starts innovating without copying others first. That's how humans learn.
Yeah, damn them for holding people to making rational arguments!
So how many centuries until it is acceptable to use names from anime, movies or Tolkien?
This is not an actual question. It is a whine.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/J...
Who said they didn't accept the english? Maybe it was submitted in its Latin form, since science related names in the West is latinized? Why are you so offended?
He did say in theory.
You can call it a Latin name if you want. You would be surprised to learn that other countries with their own language even have a different word than "Moon" to refer to the Moon!
Because one is not Chinese and the other is.
Exactly right. Now matter HOW they achieve this. Innovation does not occur predictably. The "any way will do" attitude is what allows innovation to happen.