Bradwarden0047 t1_j3ona5k wrote

I think if you're a skiing person, most enthusiasts will choose the Swiss Alps over the Canadian Rockies. Temperatures are a big factor and the Canadian treeline goes much, much higher, so the skiing slopes aren't quite what you get in the Alps.

We can't argue over what looks beautiful to your eye versus mine, but if we're comparing sheer scale, then the crown has to go to the Canadian Rockies. That feeling of vast wilderness, loneliness and serenity in huge, stunning landscape is unreal there. I was camping at a spot that was 600km from any major city in any direction. Imagine that. It's a surreal feeling. And you don't get that night sky either.

If you're looking for more of a touristy experience, then the Alps will give you that. But the town of Banff (my least favourite part of the Rockies) will be comparable.


Bradwarden0047 t1_isy4oyl wrote

Actually you should read the article first before preaching it. This finding details only the Corona Borealis constellation. Not the entire sky. Maybe try reading beyond the first paragraph next time.

Hipparchus is thought to have charted the entire night sky and click baity articles like this create the impression that this discovery is it. They bank on the fact that people like you just read the headline or first paragraph and become experts on the subject.


Bradwarden0047 t1_iswps9p wrote

Perhaps you should look into what ancient Egyptian astronomy actually consisted of. The tomb of Ramses for example not only maps out the stars, but also the trajectory the relevant stars take for an observer on Earth. Supposedly something similar is so "surprising" about this discovery. But again - they're not Europeans. Also, they are just attributing this to Hipparchus based on the position of the fixed stars at the time, and as it roughly aligns with his lifetime, it must be him and can be noone else!