champu

8 mm Sigma on an aps-c looks like the attached. The lens is capturing a 180 deg field of view, it's just falling off the edges of the sensor. This will happen with almost all lenses you use on an aps-c camera (the 4.5 mm being the only exception I'm aware of.)

Uh oh, you're back in this thread again.

From the horses mouth, it all starts with hatred. I don't know about you but before I start an investigation of something I like to get good and angry and hate-filled. I find it helps me stay objective.

I convert nebulous comments of concern from our customers into tasks (additional analyses, tests, etc.) we can do something about. Then I a) do something about it or b) give it to someone else to do. If all goes well the customers sleep well and the spacecraft work when we put them together.

I tried to search for a conspiracy theory to post here as a joke regarding the OCO launch failure last winter and how it must have been sabotaged. I was a bit surprised at the results. It seems there's no consensus amongst those suggesting sabotage on which side would be responsible for it. I think that's hilarious.

I suppose you're right. Sorry about how that came off, the post was meant as a soft jab to the shoulder. Outside of old-school philosophy texts I'm just so used to seeing, "Q.E.D.", especially when used in a sardonic tone.

As JP mentioned, it's not a shuttle it's a Delta II out of VAFB. Most likely one of these guys (an Italian SAR bird) The knee in the trajectory is the launch vehicle making a b-line South to get into a sun-synchronous orbit.

Who the heck writes out "quod erat demonstrandum"? Do you also write out "exempli gratia" and "id est"?

Well, it's incredibly important we blame this made up issue on someone, and fast.

I'm glad things are settling back out but, as with all economic phenomena, there are two sides to every story. There's a long road ahead and I would hope we don't forget so soon the pitfalls of the "Mission Accomplished" attitude.

Okay... Federal huh? Are you suggesting they imported intoxicating liquors for a commercial purpose without involving the provincial board? And BC is a province, so I'm not sure how territorial laws were violated. Consumption laws were violated. Consumption laws are: Territorial, federal or provincial. Sorry, up thread you also said... I was trying to figure out what federal drinking laws they broke since you've brought them up twice now. Are you sure it stops there? Are there any Intergalactic Decrees that need enforcing? Look, I get your point, you think the olympics are a different animal and athletes that participate in them should all understand that. I agree. I don't want the olympics to be just like every other sports league. That said, I don't think this was a big deal considering they were in an otherwise empty arena, and they issued an apology. Now quit post-vomiting all over this thread.

So basically guys who are smart think you should be allowed to sleep around but choose not to, idiots who believe it will land them in hell do so anyway, and we still don't have a rational explanation for why women do anything they do? ...sounds about right.

Holy Shit! Looks like that fucker also co-opted the STS-127 Insignia last summer, and now he wants to cancel Constellation! Or maybe insignias for space related missions tend to all look like that.

Okay... Federal huh? Are you suggesting they imported intoxicating liquors for a commercial purpose without involving the provincial board? And BC is a province, so I'm not sure how territorial laws were violated.

Sounds like Olestra, the "fake fat" that wouldn't make you fat because the molecules were too large to be digested. You'll never gain any weight if everything you eat comes out your ass 5 seconds later going 60 mph.

I think people here should start calling them re-PUBE-corpo-con-clown-fasci-scum-li-urrr-urrrrrrr-urrrrrrrrrrrrrrr and say that out loud to themselves as they type it.

...well I suppose if you were in a low enough inclination retrograde orbit... hell, with a properly timed/inclined polar orbit you can make the sun rise in the South and set in the North

To try to bring the analogy back on track I'll attemt to interpret yours. Are you trying to say that a higher percentage of engineers will agree with the official story versus a small minority that oppose the official story? Off what statistic do you base this assertion? There are 1000’s that have opposed the official story publicly and published their opinions, versus an uncounted number that campaign for the official story in a similar way. In the middle there’s the majority that would rather not talk about it. These are the people that stand on the fence because they are not sure, too scared, or simply apathetic. I think you overestimate how "on the fence" the people are that don't participate in these types of discussions. You can say thousands are behind it and point to a website and that's great... or you can make up numbers and say millions and millions of people support the movement and that's great too. Everyone else doesn't. The point of my analogy is that I don't think you're being very objective from where you sit about evaluating the statements that are coming from the different camps. This is why people keep bringing up the fact that you're not an engineer. This is why I asked you why you stand behind the bad physical arguments when its really the political motivations that have you chasing this movement. The day you were allowed to speak openly about it without ridicule was back in 2002 when Thierry Meyssan started writing about it. His work spawned countless evaluations and rebuttals that were quite serious. It went back and forth a couple times and in the end most people agreed that his theories didn't pan out. 2003 comes around and the US invades Iraq, the events that follow make the US very unpopular, and there's a huge reemergence of the conspiracy theories. Well guess what, not liking the US for going into Iraq doesn't make 9/11 conspiracy theories about controlled demolitions and missing planes any less ridiculous.

Damn it... see... replies like this are part of the problem in these threads. Now he's just going to pass over the point I was making in post #624, and reply to your post instead. If he's confronted later about dodging questions he will then cite the fact that he replied to this post of yours as proof he addressed all questions and he gets to (in his own mind) sweep my question under the rug.

wait wait wait ... everyone went all "1984" and "religion in school" on this thread and missed the best part of the article: omg its teh drugz!

If 100's of other orthopedic surgons would suggest so, and document it in laymans terms and cite the rules, regulations and evidence. Then with your knowledge acquired you would have reasonable grounds to question the authenticity of the said orthopedic surgon. Absolutely you'd have grounds to raise the question. But suppose the rest of the orthopedic surgeons (roughly 20,100 of them; you said "100s" so I'll give you 300 on your side) all reviewed the case and said, "No, the doc didn't do anything wrong." Do you think your biology class would help you decide who was right or do you think the fact that you had a limp you were pissed off about would help you decide who was right?

On the bright side, it shouldn't be difficult to get a warrant to search the nest of this seagull.

Not nearly as chaotic as the cat juries, chimps with guns, or trying to read miranda rights to a macaw.

I wouldn't cite having taken a high school biology class as sufficient background for bringing a case of malpractice against an orthopedic surgeon because a bone didn't heal quite how you thought it should.

First off... I live in a city with the word "Beach" in the name; if I thought taxes were a punishment that would make me a masochist. Truth is I don't see them as a punishment nor a realignment, I see them as a way to pay for shit. Despite your assumptions regarding what "my party" is and further what that means about me, I'm not universally against social programs. I think there are basic things that should be provided as a safety net and I think we, as a country, should add/improve upon programs to help people get out of that safety net and back onto their feet. Once we figure out what an appropriate safety net/recovery program looks like, we should figure out how best to pay for it. Scope creep, if you're familiar with the concept, is something that I think is very dangerous to the long term workability of a social safety net. So allow me to tweak my explanation of our disagreement just a tad. Taxes on the wealthy are not, and should not be considered, a social program in and of themselves. I'm under the impression you feel they should be regardless of what the needy actually need. That's what I meant by, "all the wrong reasons." As an aside, I think I got what you're trying to say from the rest of the paragraph, but that analogy makes no sense to me.