Mars Email - Not Again!

Well, it's going around again this year. The email/powerpoint presentation that Mars will be "spectacular" in August. Something about Mars appearing to be the size of the Moon. "Closest approach in recorded history!" Has anyone else seen this? Where does this originate?

Thanks
Bill

It started popping up where I work today also. As many times as that thing has been around, you'd think just about everyone was on to it by now. I've had several people come up to me and say, "hey, have you heard about this?". Yeesh.

Yes, I got one from a co-worker. I don't know who sent it to him. Another co-worker asked me if I had heard that Mars was going to be close this August. A member of our local astronomy club even fell for the same rumor. Aaaaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhh!

Bill Possel said:

Well, it's going around again this year. The email/powerpoint presentation that Mars will be "spectacular" in August. Something about Mars appearing to be the size of the Moon. "Closest approach in recorded history!" Has anyone else seen this? Where does this originate?

Yikes, that outdated e-mail is getting recirculated mighty early this year. It applies to an event that occurred in August of 2003. Usually we don’t start getting these posts until August. The problem began when the originator of the message failed to mention the year. Often it comes with information that has become highly distorted by many reinterpretations. It’s true that in 2003 Mars came its closest to Earth in over 50,000 years and won’t come closer until 2287. It’s also true that through a 75 power telescope Mars appeared as large as a naked-eye Full Moon. Some reprints fail to mention the need for a telescope. Mars reaches opposition from the Sun relative to Earth on an average of 2.135 years and comes especially close every 15 or 17 years. The opposition of 2018 will be quite good, especially from the southern hemisphere. Below is a graphic I created to illustrate the relative positions among the Earth, Mars and Sun over a number of oppositions.

Bill Possel said:

Well, it's going around again this year. The email/powerpoint presentation that Mars will be "spectacular" in August. Something about Mars appearing to be the size of the Moon. "Closest approach in recorded history!" Has anyone else seen this? Where does this originate?

Thanks
Bill

Yep. Every year. It's so ubiquitous now that I developed a PowerPoint "Debunking Mars" to show my astronomy students.

Some folks are using the term hoax. I’d call it a comedy of errors.

If I were a police profiler, here is what I would hypothesize. I see a teenager who had recently gotten into both astronomy and producing PowerPoint presentations. When he read reports of Mars making a close approach in 2003, he saw an opportunity to impress and excite his friends by announcing the astronomical event with a PowerPoint presentation. He cut and pasted some text which included dates but not the year, which seemed unnecessary since it was published that year. For dramatic effect, he mentioned the need for magnification on one slide and then displayed a magnified image of Mars next to a Full Moon on the next slide. Although it was not his intent, some sloppy readers took no notice of the mention of the need for magnification. Meanwhile, the presenter overlooked the power of the internet grapevine to keep information circulating even after it had become outdated. His leaving out the year was an error, but it’s understandable if he cut and pasted from sources that also left out the year.

While my attempt to profile is pure speculation, I nevertheless feel the term hoax is inappropriate. Hoax implies intentional deceit. I can understand how some of us in the astronomical community get annoyed by this Mars announcement every year and want to “blame” somebody. Let’s not blame the perpetrator for intentional mischievousness, but instead for unbridled enthusiasm which got him trapped into overlooking possible consequences.

This Mars misunderstanding is not a matter of great importance. Distortions of political or larger scientific questions can be more harmful. Nevertheless, the lesson to be learned is that the originators, redistributors and consumers of information on the internet need to always be careful, keep a skeptical eye open and apply astute judgment.