>>7750894
>a gambling fallacy is that red is less likely to turn up after a string of reds
pic confirmed for shit

>>7750948
No sure where you read that

>>7750894
I personally own a telescope. I love it. It's a relaxing activity to do at the end of the day and gets the imagination going. It's also something that keeps the mind busy since skill is involved in finding whatever it is you want to look at.

>>7750951
No. 6.
Other areas in the pic are shit too

>>7750954
You're the one that's shit, Mr. Shit.

Mr. Shit is your new name from now on.

>>7750954
more or less *

>>7750953
Which model? I'm planning on getting one at the start of next year and I'm not sure where to look.

>>7750894
A microscope can be a good toy, but for most kids a strong hand magnifier or loupe would be more appreciated.

>>7751092
Not the fine gentleman you replied to, but I have a Celestron Astromaster 70. Got it maybe 5 years ago. It's a pretty good telescope for amateur shit in the backyard. Can see the moon very nicely and can see planets like Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn very clearly. Saturn in particular is gorgeous. Also great for looking at stars.

If you've got the cash I'd probably get a better model, but if not then you can't go wrong with that one. You can get a few extra magnifiers and filters on ebay pretty cheap too, which I recommend if you're moon gazing.

>>7751102
Basically, if you're buying a telescope, buy the best one you can afford. A cheap telescope is ineffective and not very fun to use.

>>7751109
Thanks

>>7751109
>>7751122
I just looked it up, my budget is a few thousand - what would you say in that case?

>>7751126
Try here:
http://space.about.com/od/telescopesandoptics/tp/tpbegscop1000up.htm

>>7751126
That really depends anon

I would read a telescope buyers guide from a well respected website before you succeed with such a big investment

>>7750954
>>7750948
pic is very real and everyone is subject to it.
Instead of saying pic is shit, maybe you could learn from it and try to use it to your advantage instead.

>>7750948
isn't that a gambling fallacy tho?