This is not a real picture of today's eclipse. Photo: A4size-ska / DeviantArt
Show Hide image

This is not a picture of today's eclipse

Don't trust everything you read.

A total eclipse was visible from the UK today, for the first time since 1999. (And the last until the next one, due in 2090.) Many, many people are currently tweeting the above picture, claiming it's a picture taken by astronauts on the International Space Station.

Even New Scientist tweeted it (though they've now deleted that), and ITV posted it as well (before also deleting the page from their site). This is because it is obviously not real. It's a 2009 illustration by a DeviantArt user called A4size-ska.

There are two things that give this away. The first is the sheer unreality of it - it looks like CGI, and the spheres of the Moon and Sun are significantly larger than they truly appear from the Earth (or near the Earth). The shadow this eclipse casts is also stretched out, rather than a neat circle.

Secondly, we know what an eclipse looks like from space. It looks like this:

Photo: CNES

That's a picture of the shadow cast by the Moon on the Earth during the 11 August 1999 solar eclipse. It was taken by the crew of the Mir space station, during one of its last few missions before it was decommissioned and allowed to burn up and fall back to Earth in 2001.

However, it's understandable that some people might have reached for something a bit spectacular, as the view of the eclipse this morning for much of us in the UK (including from the NS offices) was this:

PS: A further public service announcement is necessary, to make clear you should ignore anything Ukip MEP Roger Helmer claims about climate change and/or the Sun, today or any day:

The man's a fool.

Ian Steadman is a staff science and technology writer at the New Statesman. He is on Twitter as @iansteadman.

@Simon_Cullen via Twitter
Show Hide image

All 27 things wrong with today’s Daily Mail front cover

Where do I even start?

Hello. Have you seen today’s Daily Mail cover? It is wrong. Very wrong. So wrong that if you have seen today’s Daily Mail cover, you no doubt immediately turned to the person nearest to you to ask: “Have you seen today’s Daily Mail cover? It is wrong.”

But just how wrong is the wrong Mail cover? Let me count the ways.

  1. Why does it say “web” and not “the web”?
  2. Perhaps they were looking on a spider’s web and to be honest that makes more sense because
  3. How does it take TWO MINUTES to use a search engine to find out that cars can kill people?
  4. Are the Mail team like your Year 8 Geography teacher, stuck in an infinite loop of typing G o o g l e . c o m into the Google search bar, the search bar that they could’ve just used to search for the thing they want?
  5. And then when they finally typed G o o g l e . c o m, did they laboriously fill in their search term and drag the cursor to click “Search” instead of just pressing Enter?
  6. The Daily Mail just won Newspaper of the Year at the Press Awards
  7. Are the Daily Mail – Newspaper of the Year – saying that Google should be banned?
  8. If so, do they think we should ban libraries, primary education, and the written word?
  9. Sadly, we know the answer to this
  10. Google – the greatest source of information in the history of human civilisation – is not a friend to terrorists; it is a friend to teachers, doctors, students, journalists, and teenage girls who aren’t quite sure how to put a tampon in for the first time
  11. Upon first look, this cover seemed so obviously, very clearly fake
  12. Yet it’s not fake
  13. It’s real
  14. More than Google, the Mail are aiding terrorists by pointing out how to find “manuals” online
  15. While subsets of Google (most notably AdSense) can be legitimately criticised for profiting from terrorism, the Mail is specifically going at Google dot com
  16. Again, do they want to ban Google dot com?
  17. Do they want to ban cars?
  18. Do they want to ban search results about cars?
  19. Because if so, where will that one guy from primary school get his latest profile picture from?
  20. Are they suggesting we use Bing?
  21. Why are they, once again, focusing on the perpetrator instead of the victims?
  22. The Mail is 65p
  23. It is hard to believe that there is a single person alive, Mail reader or not, that can agree with this headline
  24. Three people wrote this article
  25. Three people took two minutes to find out cars can drive into people
  26. Trees had to die for this to be printed
  27. It is the front cover of the Mail

Amelia Tait is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman.