Five petabytes of data isn't enough for Luis. Too many holes to fill in. (You know, besides the one being observed.)
[insert obvious obviousness about quality not being about quantity]
I mean, it's not as if the end result isn't a bitmap with less than 100kb of data, upsized on photoshopped with nearest neighbor filter or smth.
But my point was different, I won't repeat myself. Those who are bent to misunderstand me won't profit from such effort.
It's not as if we hadn't had conclusive evidence of black holes before,
We, uh, hadn't. Look it up. Previous observational evidence proved, I believe, the existence of various ultra-compact objects bounded by a sphere less than about 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius, but this is the first time observations have been able to directly probe the event horizon.
Don't mind Luis, I can't recall the last time I've seen him be positive about anything.
He's on my ignore list, so if you hadn't quoted him it wouldn't even have crossed my mind in the first place
. His point is just pedantic to the extreme, all predictions about the nature of BHs had been confirmed multiple times from multiple angles, astrophysicists have been studying supermassive black holes for a lot of decades now, no one has seriously doubted their existence for eons now.