how stupid can you get?

[calimac]

So John Scalzi posted that he's looking for a science researcher to help with his next novel, and among the areas of expertise he wants the researcher to help with are:

• Selenology (generally, not necessarily relating to the Earth's moon)
  
• Geology (generally, not necessarily relating to the Earth)
  

The "not necessarily relating" raised a definitional question in my mind, so I posted a comment asking:

If they're not being restricted to the Earth and our Moon, then what exactly is the difference between geology and selenology? Is it an arbitrary distinction between planets and moons? Or does it mean "bodies that physically resemble the Earth/Moon"? (e.g. that one has plate tectonics and an atmosphere and the other doesn’t)

Is that clear? Apparently not to the person who next commented, who so helpfully explained,

Selenology is the study of the geology and features of the moon and how it came to be. There is a lot of info available on this.

Unfortunately the thread was already a couple of days old and Scalzi closed it before I saw this and could reply, so I'll expostulate here instead:

Did this person not read the opening phrase of my post? Did they not read Scalzi's "not necessarily relating to the Earth's moon"? Do they have trouble understanding what the word "not" means? How could they possibly have read my post, which discusses the Moon, and thought I didn't know what the word "selenology" means? Isn't it obvious that I'm a step ahead of you and am asking how you apply it beyond the basic dictionary meaning which I know perfectly well and which I do the courtesy of assuming that the readers do too? Or is this person a lazy incapable reader who saw a post with questions and the word "selenology" in it, and assumed without reading it that the question must be not knowing what "selenology" means?

I'm kind of stunned by the degree of ignorance it must take to draw that meaning out of my post. Or, if it was sheer laziness and not bothering to read the post, why they then bothered to take the time to display what they thought was their superior learning.

Sorry, but this degree of ignorance and condescension masquerading as superior learning in the form of things too basic to need to be explained - it really frosts me.

Comments

[andrewducker]

"Is it an arbitrary distinction between planets and moons?" - I had assumed that.

And yes, that person was being an idiot.

[voidampersand]

It looks like Scalzi is posting for a planetary science researcher. Planetary science includes moons as well as planets like Earth.

It is normal for people to react without full comprehension. See Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow.

[athenais]

I'd feel pretty frosty, too.

[steepholm]

That kind of thing is indeed irksome. However, there will never be a shortage of idiots on the internet, and the fact that you weren't able to put this one right won't materially have increased their overall numbers.