3 years, 200 scientists, a trillion dollars, for this image.
Is it worth it? Did they ask tax payers?
3 years, 200 scientists, a trillion dollars, for this image
Cameron Jenkins
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Chase Morgan
>tfw space is an entirely Jewish concept
Bentley Sanders
I could have done it in a day and for 1 million tax payer dollars .
Jack Ward
Looks like a cherry froot lup
Hunter Scott
Its a watermelon lifesavers, duh. Do you even science?
Michael Collins
Evan White
Do you have a source for that money figure?
Jayden Baker
Throw an extreme gaussian blur over it. There's way too much detail there.
Jayden Garcia
youtube.com
Could have you though? Regardless,
whats the point of being here if it isn't one of our goals to understand as much as we possibly can about the space we live in? The more we understand about what's around us, whether it be a few miles underground of millions of light-years away, will help us expand as a society/people in some way, shape or form. Do you find peace in only monetary value? Do you not value knowledge and science?
Aiden Smith
NASA/DARPA/Whatever Goverment Agency started this project with assistance from MIT professors. After getting the basics set, tell MIT to finish the project using grad students who they can pay pennies compared to NASA scientists, and pick a lead who will be photogenic, etc. MIT finds this chick, who I'm sure a highly skilled comp sci student, and gives her this as her doctoral thesis. She "leads" the team with guidance from her profs and NASA scientists and gets to be the face when it is complete. No one looks in to the fact that it's basically a photoshop of a single pixel composite of 50 telescopes. The 50 telescope sites get a combined $10 billion in US goverment funds to continue photographing non-photographicable space objects for the next 5 years until they can find another "breakthrough."
Jack Gomez
We already have space on earth largely unexplored. The ocean. Makes you think why kikes will drop trillions for science fiction in space instead of reality on earth.
Aaron Jenkins
Lucas Johnson
SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU FILTHY GOY.
CELEBRATE HER, HER TRIBE, HER NOSE, AND HER VAGINA RIGHT NOW!!!!
Lucas Perry
Of course, hence why I stress the point of money, so long as it isn't detrimental to a populous/citizens or is used privately, should not matter. Exploration has always been a cornerstone of human civilization and it should always be our goal to explore as many corners we possibly can
Dylan Adams
true, they need constant headlines to keep their funding coming. I'm not against funding science, but it's extremely dubious the value of their work. there are a lot more projects that can be funded instead of massaging a few bit of info in distance.
John Kelly
But I see the point you're trying to make. Clearly the technology just isn't there yet and maybe we've hit a wall with withstanding the pressure of undersea exploration? I don't know, I've never really taken interest in the ocean nearly as much as I've taken interest in space.
Noah Rivera
ITT: Brainlet faggots that don't understand how pictures in space work.
Blake Flores
>WHY IS IT NOT AWESOME LOOKING LIKE IN MOVIES N SHHHEEEIIIT WE WASTED MONEY
stfu faggot go suck a dick
Brandon Mitchell
I've become aware that it was only 8 radio telescopes worldwide after reading all of the threads. 8. The money is probably less than 1 billion being distributed. Maybe only like 10 million. But the press for SPACE and SCIENCE is priceless. I need to hear about how this was more than blowing up, chopping up, adjusting contrast, and reconstructing as a higher resolution photo, a composite of a few pixels.
Ethan Sanchez
To be fair, I bet astrophysicists used photos of objects on earth and the moon and other solar objects to come up with a formula about light from the sun, and then extrapolated that to light from stars nearest the blackhole to determine how bright to make contrast work with the blown up and chopped up pixel that had the blackhole. It's still photoshop, but they can at least claim complicated algorithms behind it.
Michael Ortiz
youtube.com
Video is from yesterday.....nothing too see here.