He likened the nova explosion to a hydrogen bomb detonating in space, adding that the resulting fireball is essentially what people will be able to see from Earth. (A nova is different from a supernova explosion, which occurs when a massive star collapses and dies.)
At its peak, the eruption should be visible to the naked eye, Schaefer said: “It’s going to be bright in the sky, so it’ll be easily visible from your backyard.”
Astronomers predict that the nova explosion could happen anytime between now and September. The last time this particular star system erupted was in 1946, Schaefer said, and another eruption will likely not occur for another 80 years or so.
Astronomers around the world are monitoring activity in the T Coronae Borealis system. Once an eruption is detected, Schaefer said, the best and brightest views will likely come within 24 hours, when it reaches roughly the same brightness as the North Star. The outburst may remain visible to the naked eye for a couple of days before it begins to fade.
Will be visible in the Northern Hemisphere. Hope it´s soon.
stanky wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 3:52 pmwell, i had to ask the morality police about this and they told me that keeping this sort of curiosity to yourself is what leads to anti-social behavior such as rape and pedophilia.
Oh, wait, maybe you have a point just let me think about this no that's actually complete bullshit.
Perhaps you sense that i'm merely being cantankerous and argumentative...
but there is a larger point that has validity.
In my background, there was the input from the Catholic church. Incomprehensibly absurd regarding sexuality; from Adam and Eve's messed up relationship to the water-walker's tormented and sexless existence...clearly God (an old male figure without a female counterpart) has serious issues regarding genitals. A curious child will wonder why it is inappropriate to be naked; why grown-ups have such intense hang-ups; why even in sex-ed class, somehow the nuts and bolts of reproduction are avoided entirely and hints at the truth must be gleaned from the hoodlum element within a child's orbit. The birds and bees talk never happened with my generation.
Masturbation, a mortal sin, was a completely shameful act that must remain your secret shame. Not even your best friends can know about it. Being caught naked in public was the ultimate humiliation and so on.
I jump ahead to the liberation of the 60's and the hippy-type open attitude about sexuality and nudity. Suddenly, it was ok to be naked. Nude beaches allowed a saner approach to sexuality. Kids could hang out with naked adults. There were no shameful secrets to keep locked up. It was difficult for the prudish sector of 'decent, moral people' to wrap their heads around this obvious sign of moral decay.
But here's the thing: There was never an erect penis. That would have been fairly inappropriate. Being naked together required a confidence that hidden sexual agendas were flushed out prior. The moral degenerates were easy to spot...the Mormon missionaries hiding behind trees to get a glimpse of the depravity while fully dressed in god-like clothing or the local redneck guys who liked to watch the naked girls from a distance but who were shy to join the group, possibly because they couldn't trust themselves to have control over their shameful and anti-social attitudes towards the human anatomy...which, after all, had been driven into them via the normal brain washing of societal norms. They lacked the advantage of psychedelic drugs which were instrumental on shaking free of perverted data absorbed from the morality police. Who were the freaks in this?
In an effort to find out, we can ponder the long arc of human experience. In nomadic hunter gatherer societies, it would have been impossible for kids to not know what the 'score' was. Australian Aborigines, for instance, were mostly naked. The kids saw adult penises and vaginas. and tits. They probably saw fucking. same with native Americans...there wasn't much privacy in that tepee on the prairie in winter. Later on, farm kids also knew what was what, from seeing the animals 'doing it' and connecting that with the baby lamb later on.
I'd venture that it's only quite recently that humans have had the luxury (?) of putting sexuality in a separate, secret box, and applying weird mythology to add to the obfuscation. The common sense morality and politeness we've come to regard as normal, is actually perverse and leads to the enabling of secret agendas and perversions.
Now we are bombarded with the sickness relentlessly. We suffered through the milli-second of Janet Jackson's exposed nipple; we wince at the various wardrobe malfunctions of movie stars and the purposeful side-boob exposures of famous females an the nearly see-through dresses that still have some fascination for normal society. At the logical end of this moral decay, we have the fundamentalist religious oppression of the Taliban and the shame of female skin, along with the sanctioned raping of boys which somehow does not offend God. That oppression seeks an outlet. It leads to rape and shame and dark secrets. Until recently, it sheltered the inevitable bad behavior of the religiously celibate Catholic priests.
so, maybe what i suggested wasn't exactly bullshit?
That having taboo subjects can only lead to taboo actions.
Especially when we're dealing with the most important aspect of human existence.
I have complete trust in myself. I have stood naked in front of the lord without shame.
As have all the other mammals...including the humans...up until very recently.
("Lord" is interchangeable with "children" )
What is shrouded in secrecy is bound to emerge in unpleasant ways.
I'd love to see a full exposure of all the secrets of governments.
Imagine if honesty was a desirable trait for humanity at large, and deception wasn't a normal feature of our zeitgeist!
Nothing to hide! No dark niches for the growth of harmful molds.
I didn't read all of your wall of text, but I read enough to understand that what you're talking about is very much not the same as approaching someone and saying "you look trans - do you have a penis?"
Any trans person subjected to that would be very justified in replying "What? Fuck off, I'm not telling you, you creep. Leave me the fuck alone."
If you're not on edge, you're taking up too much space.
arthwollipot wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2024 9:53 pm
I didn't read all of your wall of text, but I read enough to understand that what you're talking about is very much not the same as approaching someone and saying "you look trans - do you have a penis?"
Any trans person subjected to that would be very justified in replying "What? Fuck off, I'm not telling you, you creep. Leave me the fuck alone."
What, did somebody ask you that somewhere one time? Your reaction here seems inappropriate
Because it sure as fuck isn´t what stanky said.
stanky wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 6:23 pm
she was also the all around best athlete in the world for a while.
i don't know if she has a cunt.
its not polite to ask about trans's genitals.
but that's the part i'd like to know about.
It's the "that's the part I'd like to know about" bit that got me worked up.
No, I don't care whether you know I have a penis or not. But I have a number of trans friends who would be highly offended if they knew that their genitals were the most interesting part of them.
If you're not on edge, you're taking up too much space.
i'm sorry, trans people, for my offensive and insensitive remarks.
i'm a dumb galoot and you don't have to wonder about my filthy parts, so it's not quite fair.
but i forgive you.
I know a guy, a mineral dealer with Tourette's syndrome, who is rumored to have a huge penis according to another mineral dealer.
His Tourette's is more interesting far as I´m concerned. When he met the First Lady he started pounding the table in front of him to keep from shouting out ¨TITS TITSTITS BITCH TITS!¨
Yeah man.
If a trans person had strong Tourette's, i'd ignore the genitals.
Conjoined twins, same thing. Two heads trumps ambiguous nether regions.
Unless one of them is married.
Then i'd be curious about the sex position stuff and who feels what and stuff.
i bet there's someone out there that has the most number of fascinating conditions in the world.
If i knew who it was, i'd be a fan. Never been in a fan club.
(gotta get out of this; just digging a deeper hole.)
Just found a fellow who I bet C Nolan at least partially based on his character, Leonard (Sammy?) on...
On 27 March 1985, Wearing, then an acknowledged expert in early music at the height of his career with BBC Radio 3, contracted herpesviral encephalitis, a herpes simplex virus that attacked his central nervous system. Since then, he has been unable to store new memories. He has also been unable to associate memories effectively or to control his emotions, exhibiting unstable moods.
Wearing developed a profound case of total amnesia as a result of his illness. Because of damage to the hippocampus (an area required to transfer memories from short-term to long-term memory), he is completely unable to form lasting new memories. His memory for events lasts between seven and thirty seconds. He spends every day 'waking up' every 20 seconds or so, 'restarting' his consciousness once the timespan of his short-term memory has elapsed. During this time, he repeatedly questions why he has not seen a doctor, as he constantly believes that he has only recently awoken from a comatose state. If he is engaged in conversation, he is able to provide answers to questions, but he cannot stay in the flow of conversation for longer than a few sentences and is angered if he is asked about his current situation.
Wearing remembers little of his life before 1985. He knows, for example, that he has children from an earlier marriage, but he cannot remember their names. His love for his second wife, Deborah, whom he married the year before his illness began, is undiminished. He greets her joyously every time they meet, believing either that he has not seen her in years or that they have never met before, even though she may have just left the room momentarily. When he goes out dining with his wife, he can remember the names of food, but he cannot link them with taste, as he forgets what food he is eating by the time it has reached his mouth.
...
Wearing can learn new procedures and even a very few facts, not from episodic memory or encoding, but by acquiring new procedural memories through repetition. For example, having watched a certain video recording multiple times on successive days, he never had any memory of ever seeing the video or knowing the content, but he was able to anticipate certain parts of the content without remembering how he learned them.
Despite having no memory of specific musical pieces when they are mentioned by name and an extremely limited recall of his previous musical knowledge, Wearing remains capable of playing complex piano and organ pieces, sight-reading and conducting a choir.
