In the theoretical process they are talking about, no additional mass would be added to a stellified planet. Gravity would go about it’s business as usual.

I don’t get to use mine much. It’s a 130mm Celestron and its a pain in the ass to move. I found this Barlow to be easier to use than most.

What eyepiece are you using? Are you also using a Barlow? Your telescope should be capable of images at least that good with the right eye pieces.

Quest for Glory is so much better than Kings Quest.

Best of all time.

Aw, gee wiz, I’m sure Tumblr was just about to start turning some real profit too.

Booker is also against teachers unions and enthusiastically pro wall-street. Probably wouldn’t play well this election.

One of my favorite t-shirts.

I’m betting the big guy gassed out before he ever caught him.

A lot of this was presented really well in Tim’s Vermeer.

Classical usage for sure. You are correct. I should be more careful with my colloquial speech around here.

*you’re

A perfectly valid, if forceful, opinion.

Again, I’m not going to argue about your sense of humor.

This setup is inferred by the first panel’s use of “strict” in quotation. His ignorance about the NAT is confirmed in panel 3 which makes his irrationality about it humorous.

I get it, dude. It doesn’t play to your sense of humor. I’m not going to argue that with you.

It’s not funny to you. I don’t find Jeff Dunham and his puppets particularly funny, but that doesn’t stop him from being one of the most successful comedians of all time.

Well I’m certainly not going to argue about your sense of humor. But, there is a setup (the NAT being strict) and a punch which is the argument from ignorance over said NAT. Not the greatest joke, but it doesn’t need additional information.

What extra info do you need for this comic to work?

Pretty sure I still have the issue of GamePro where they breathlessly talked about how awesome “Zelda 64" was gonna be on the DD.