Flawed Artist's Renditions of Cosmological Events

[ebos]

So am I the only one or are others as bugged as I am with these useless artist's renditions of occurrences of cosmological events that either have absolutely no resemblance to the actual event or don't supply enough information in the title to clarify that the supplied illustration is even a rendition or a real photograph of the event. My latest is "Astronomers Glimpse Supernova Shockwave - March 22, 2016" whereby the reader is led to believe that the illustration is actually a photo of the rebound shock wave at the precise moment it breaks through the surface of the star. Come on...! Do we even have cameras that fast or telescopes that sensitive??
Although I believe artist's illustrations are sometimes useful, most of the time they are not and only serve to further confuse the viewer and sensationalize the event and lower it to the level of a cartoon especially if the viewer is a newbie.

 

[Hornbein]

Unbugged am I.

 

[jimjones420]

So your answer is:

1. flawed artistic renditions = spark public interest? Like click bait?

Or do you mean:

2. increased public interest = more money & grants?

If you really want interest in science and space-- just disclose the truth about science and space. The +70 years of stagnation on the truth (which is seemingly more and more about posturing for advantages on warfare) is why all those phds fight over the shrinking money/grant watering hole by not researching those interesting gaps in moden science.

Disclosure = more interest in science you'll ever see in the history of the world.

 

[berkeman]

Disclosure = more interest in science you'll ever see in the history of the world.

I wonder if anything has changed in the past 8 years since the posts you are responding to...

Spoiler

Every time you necropost, God kills a kitten. Please try to avoid this; I like kittens.