4/19/2005 10:15:00 PM|||Joe|||As far as I can tell, this is for real: A russian astrologer, Marina Bai, is suing NASA for attempting to harm her “system of spiritual values” by crashing a ship into it.

The article is inconsistent. In one passage, it says that the ship will destroy the comet, while another says it will merely make a crater. The latter is true.

Now, all this is funny and easy to poke fun at, but I want to concentrate on a particular claim:

“The actions of NASA infringe upon my system of spiritual and life values, in particular on the values of every element of creation, upon the unacceptability of barbarically interfering with the natural life of the universe, and the violation of the natural balance of the Universe,” Bai said in her claim. [Emphasis mine]

Again, I'm befuddled by the “The actions of NASA infringe upon my system of spiritual and life values...” part. Don't worry, I'm not going on a lawsuit rant. I'm not much for that sort of thing and I doubt this suit will really go anywhere anyway. I'm more concerned about the line I put in bold.

I've never much understood this sort of claim. It makes all these weird assumptions about humanity, such as the idea that humanity is in fact distinct from nature.

Precisely how do we not interfere with the “natural life” of the universe? What does that even mean? Is chopping down a tree interfering with it? What about planting one? Landing on the moon? Developing vaccines? Treating disease? Taking vitamins? Riding a bicycle? Cooking?

Now I understand that there are all sorts of things that humans do that aren't done elsewhere in nature. But that doesn't mean that we are somehow outside nature. And there's a difference between participating or interacting and interfering.

Anyway, crashing a tiny probe into a comet is not going to significantly impact the “natural life of the universe”, whatever that means.|||111401838134091297|||Astrologer Sues NASA