I opened this topic with the idea that the "public relations success" of those "serene landscapes" suggests that such landscapes could be similarly useful aids to marketing many of the ideas posted on this MessageBoard, in Artificial Structures on Mars, and so on.
"Organisation to bring amateurs and professionals together" could come in the form of political pressure from groups, such as members and subscribers to this and similar sites.
Why should space probe raw data not be regularly made available to the public after such a demonstration of "amateur" power? After all, all the Science producing such data has been paid for by the taxpaying public.
Why should science organisations such as ESA be allowed to continue to have such power as they have at present, to not regularly make space probe raw data immediately available, as happened in this case?
The News incident referred to in the link, about professionals being upstaged, could be used politically to move the ScienceWorld towards "more sophisticated ways . . . for greater numbers of amateurs to be involved . . . at a higher level . . ." to re-arrange meanings attributed to Flaspoehler in the link.
After all, the professionals are generally less versatile, adaptive, and would probably be outnumbered by the "amateurs". For astronomy the ratio quoted in the link is 7,000 professionals to 250,000 amateurs.
Peter Nielsen
Email: uusi@hotkey.net.au
Post: 12 View St, Sandy Bay 7005, Australia
