Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich

Black hole sun Won't you come And wash away the rain Black hole sun Won't you come Won't you come

Reply
Hide
- Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:58 EST eygzYfFg No.57629
File: 1554907258327.jpg -(66184B / 64.63KB, 1600x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Black hole sun Won't you come And wash away the rain Black hole sun Won't you come Won't you come
These absolutely crazy mofos did it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47873592

They took a picture of the universe's asshole. WTF mate, the amount of data they had to collect is just mindboggling.
>>
Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:48:25 EST 4RGLvffj No.57630 Reply
When is the first good picture?
>>
Edmond Halley - Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:05:05 EST 457vC2+I No.57631 Reply
Why is everyone on the internet so salty about the black hole pic. You guys acted like you expected the black hole pic dropping to be the fuckin rapture. It's an amazing achievement that was decades in the making, and people from major science and tech outlets are literally dropping thinkpieces about how no one gives a shit. What happened to the world?
>>
Viktor Ambartsumian - Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:06:16 EST 4RGLvffj No.57632 Reply
>>57631
Man, I thought I was just shit posting, is it really that bad?
>>
George Herbig - Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:19:01 EST AMvzF062 No.57633 Reply
>>57631
it was hyped retardedly and the story of "government scientist spends billions to confirm own hypothesis" is so disingenuous that nobody believes it. they were going to find what they were looking for no matter how hard the data needed to be manipulated because to do otherwise would have been admitting what a stupendous waste of cash it all was.
>>
Edmond Halley - Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:39:59 EST 457vC2+I No.57634 Reply
>>57632
I saw your post earlier and I was coming back to link some articles of the great incredulity, but look, we have one posting right here, so why bother? I will say that on day two I finally saw some more positive articles too, though.

>>57633
>>they were going to find what they were looking for no matter how hard the data needed to be manipulated because to do otherwise would have been admitting what a stupendous waste of cash it all was.
While that applies in some cases of modern astronomy ( I'm thinking mainly of that recent study that found the intra-galactic dark matter filaments by re-orienting and superimposing the images of millions of galaxies) the case with this particular black hole and why we can see it with our current tech is pretty interesting. It's mostly due to its polar orientation. It's not like its cgi; we're seeing light from the black hole.

I'm kind of afraid that the general disbelief around it implies that flat earth tier science denialism is starting to leak into the groundwater, so to speak.
>>
Rudolph Minkowski - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 00:40:32 EST aGo2dCNY No.57635 Reply
1555044032554.jpg -(8687B / 8.48KB, 512x384) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57634
maybe its intellectual laziness that might prevent one from gleefully reading about the technology involved so as to quench any disbelief or maybe its just depression over the regular reminder that there is no benefit to anyone in extragalactic studies when we're still stuck here on one planet going nowhere fast with the temperature rising and suspicious that they hype behind all this is solely a function of it's budget. the lot of us have been taught our entire lives that super science geniuses are going to make all sorts of valuable discoveries and that justifies all of their gigaspendings and decades go by with nothing to show but pretty pictures. are we all going to expire on this rock while these fags hog up all the resources and devote it to naming equations and comets and galaxies after each other?
tl;dr i'm ambivalent
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:24:09 EST 9Jb/tjD2 No.57636 Reply
>>57634
Don't worry too much. Ignore the vocal minority, they're morons anyway.
>>
George Hale - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:29:48 EST 457vC2+I No.57637 Reply
>>57635
>>super science geniuses are going to make all sorts of valuable discoveries and that justifies all of their gigaspendings and decades go by with nothing to show but pretty pictures
Says the man from his magical information machine that didn't exist decades ago.
>>
Ejnar Hertzprung - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 19:25:47 EST GcneW8jC No.57638 Reply
1555111547217.jpg -(30646B / 29.93KB, 786x826) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57637
30 years of progress and all we get out of it is replacing print media and human interaction with twitter and facebook? I guess the trillions of dollars dumped on university and government research during like the interval wasn't spent very wisely.
You should face the fact that fags like yourself get excited about shit like this for the same reason that the next big star wars movies gets you excited.
>>
George Hale - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 19:55:10 EST 457vC2+I No.57639 Reply
>>57638
>>frogposting
>>forumsliding
>>immigrant scum
Okay guy. Then how about you hop off this device which you think is so useless, to demonstrate you aren't completely talking out of your ass?
>>
Walter Baade - Fri, 12 Apr 2019 22:00:20 EST aGo2dCNY No.57640 Reply
1555120820008.png -(10960B / 10.70KB, 261x193) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57639
>me angry cause pictures i don't like!!
good argument
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Therm0ptic !cyBOrG7t12 - Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:48:59 EST ht91M9a1 No.57641 Reply
>>57640
Acknowledge the second half of his post.
Just because YOU only use it for replacing print and human interaction doesn't mean other people don't utilize the tech in mire useful ways.
>>
Thomas Gold - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 01:13:49 EST aGo2dCNY No.57643 Reply
>>57641
Theres thats post in that other thread about twitter shitposts and celbrity bullshit being beamed into to space to satisfy some entitled upper class twit's petty, swallow egotism which refutes the idea you seem to be convinced of which is that this is all valuable and worthwhile. You probably believe in "dark matter" too. You'd believe in Aristotle's epicycles if an authority figure told you to.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Thomas Gold - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 01:17:34 EST aGo2dCNY No.57644 Reply
1555478254689.png -(46999B / 45.90KB, 824x179) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
heres a pic of you licking an authority figure's spicy butthole which further suggests that you prefer to let others do your thinking for you.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Grote Reuber - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 18:53:56 EST GcneW8jC No.57646 Reply
>>57645
Imagine all those reddditfags from days of yore. all them in 1100ad or whenever was all jacking off to aristotle's cosmology the same way contemporary faggots jerk it to edwin hubble. when an inexplicable observation is made such as in galactic rotations curves some genius invents total bullshit like "dark matter" to explain it and bang! suddenly "dark matter" becomes "real". how evolved is modern science? if its all still just a bunch of backslappers jacking each other off like it was back in the pre-gallilean days then tremendous skepticism over something like the OP topic of this thread is completely warranted.
>>
Charles Bolton - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:10:21 EST 457vC2+I No.57647 Reply
>>57646
>>how evolved is modern science?
Aristotle's most advanced technology for communication was words written on a piece of paper and tied around the leg of a specially trained pigeon. Now that's not nothing, and it shows the level of advancement and societal evolution possible with the ancient worldview.
Modern science's enables the method of communication we are using right now, which involves a planet wide network of electronic fibers that coordinate quadrillions of discrete pulses of electrons which represent arbitrary mathematical functions which are decoded by an information processing wafer of silicon into a flurry of pulsing lights which are interpretable by me as the words of your petty rant.

If the one technology is more evolved than the other, then the science that created the one is more evolved than the other. Is it harder to make a computer from scratch than train a homing pigeon from scratch? Answer your own question then. This was the initial objection to your claim I posted, which you sidestepped responding to by getting triggered over me calling you out for being an alien invader not native to these boards, and a frogposter to boot. So feel free to get triggered again and prove you don't have an actual argument but just want to seem woke for saying science is dumb and haven't figured out what 'hypocrisy' is.
>>
Johan Galle - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:10:26 EST 9YXtXzja No.57648 Reply
>>57646
circlejerk didn't exist in days of youre. You're talking about usenet.
>>
Russel Hulse - Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:56:03 EST aGo2dCNY No.57650 Reply
>>57647
trying to get under someone's skin by accusing them of being "triggered" (unreasonably upset) just because they disagree with you on an anonymous imageboard just goes to show that you're not interested in any kind of discourse and you think that the honest exchange of information and social manipulation games are equivalents, so having any sort of an honest discussion of any topic with you isn't possible. go work your social manipulation techniques on the social media with the rest of your ilk, but 2+2 will never equal five no matter how much you really really want it to, no matter how entitled you feel to be right, five will always be the wrong answer.
User is currently banned from all boards
>>
Therm0ptic !cyBOrG7t12 - Thu, 18 Apr 2019 10:14:20 EST ht91M9a1 No.57651 Reply
>>57650
You would be desirable to have a real convo with if you didn't burst into barely-related rants and incorrect assumptions as a response.
>>
Charles Bolton - Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:15:42 EST 457vC2+I No.57652 Reply
>>57648
>>You're talking about usenet.
>>a flurry of pulsing lights which are interpretable by me as the words of your petty rant.
I wasn't replying to a post on usenet. The person I was replying to didn't make their post on usenet. I was replying to a post made in this thread on this board of this chan. This chan is not usenet.

>>57650
You never responded to any of the substantive claims made against what you were saying. The most basic being; how can you claim science has no use if you're using it to make that claim? You responded with progressively more childish arguments, so you got the same back in kind. Notice how merely using the word 'triggered' got you to ignore two whole paragraphs of material you could have had a discourse with? So this is more indication to me of hypocrisy; you claim to want to debate, but really you want to make unjustified claims and not back them up and get incensed over the tone of the discussion (which you brought down.) Which is fine -- but people will call you out on it.
>>go work your social manipulation techniques
If, as you claim, my objective is to get you so riled up I don't even have to bother disputing your (unpresented) arguments then that seems to be exactly what has happened, so it would seem I'm succeeding? My actual objective is to have a meaningful discussion and hopefully elevate your understanding and I'm failing at that, but as I care very little when someone is so vitriolic out the gate, it doesn't bother me much. However you can't have it both ways; either you admit that I am actually trying to have a debate and you're deflecting that, which is why I'm bad at manipulation, or I'm good at manipulation, which is why you're incapable of defending your claim.

>> 2+2 will never equal five
Indeed. But what you're saying is 2 I'm saying is 3, and we can proceed no further until we examine evidence as to whether it is actually 2 or 3.
>>
William Fowler - Sat, 20 Apr 2019 11:09:11 EST izGRJ+VN No.57653 Reply
When seeing the news about this the first thing that came to my mind was that the Internet Kooks and Alex Jones-esque "science is wrong and evil" types will be absolutely livid about this.
It seems that was right.
>>
Nicolaus Copernicus - Thu, 09 May 2019 04:08:03 EST PkLJZC5m No.57688 Reply
>>57683
Maybe because it isn't saturn and it's 50 million light years away?
>>
Tadashi Nakajima - Thu, 09 May 2019 16:55:29 EST kZncG2o1 No.57691 Reply
>>57688
Don’t use such big numbers I still get scared from getting too emotional
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.