Sigma's euphemistic name for "plastic"

In article ,
RichA wrote:

No doubt trying to allay fears that paying $1000 (Art Lens) for a partially
plastic lens is stupid.

Drum roll:

"Thermally Stable Composite Material"

Ha ha ha! Epoxy/polycarbonate with some ground-up fiberglass or carbon
fiber!!

Plastic means shapeable. Bakelite is my fave. And here's the man:

http://www.bakelit.ch/zimmermann.html

But hey! Nikon has a $2000+ lens made partially with plastic.
Sigma does have one thing going for it with the Art lens. The aspherical
element they used in it they claim is molded glass (as opposed to molded
plastic, either on its own or incorporated as part of a glass/plastic lens
hybrid) so no worries about potential yellowing down the road. Assuming any
of these electronic lenses are in use 30 years from now.

To bad that most good plastics are petroleum based and that is still
going up in mostly blue smoke, world wide.

Plastics are important in everyday life as well as in system that are
vital for the infrastructures of our society. Not to speak of
pharmaceuticals that are mission critical for a lot of folks in that
respect that they might die without them.

It would be interesting also to test one of the lenses using a plastic
aspherical internal lens over a wide temperature range to see if it has any
impact on image quality.

My pet theory is that the resistance to curb emissions of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases, from governments in high emission countries is the
fear of a new iceage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...mini-ICE-AGE-w
ay-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html

I think they are wrong. **** happens... Like that messing with
temperature of sea water cold disable the "pump" that keeps the golf
stream going and start new glaciers in western europe that in turn would
spread en make the earth a slushy snowball...
--
teleportation kills

In article ,
RichA wrote:

On Sunday, 1 January 2017 04:32:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

No doubt trying to allay fears that paying $1000 (Art Lens) for a
partially
plastic lens is stupid.

Drum roll:

"Thermally Stable Composite Material"

Ha ha ha! Epoxy/polycarbonate with some ground-up fiberglass or carbon
fiber!!

Plastic means shapeable. Bakelite is my fave. And here's the man:

http://www.bakelit.ch/zimmermann.html

But hey! Nikon has a $2000+ lens made partially with plastic.
Sigma does have one thing going for it with the Art lens. The aspherical
element they used in it they claim is molded glass (as opposed to molded
plastic, either on its own or incorporated as part of a glass/plastic
lens
hybrid) so no worries about potential yellowing down the road. Assuming
any
of these electronic lenses are in use 30 years from now.

To bad that most good plastics are petroleum based and that is still
going up in mostly blue smoke, world wide.

Plastics are important in everyday life as well as in system that are
vital for the infrastructures of our society. Not to speak of
pharmaceuticals that are mission critical for a lot of folks in that
respect that they might die without them.

It would be interesting also to test one of the lenses using a plastic
aspherical internal lens over a wide temperature range to see if it has
any
impact on image quality.

My pet theory is that the resistance to curb emissions of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases, from governments in high emission countries is the
fear of a new iceage.

Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming off
the last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and
will begin to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something
like 8 of them, no reason to think that's over.

Actually, you can have it both ways... You snipped the best part! :-ppp

In article ,
android wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...mini-ICE-AGE-w
ay-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html

I think they are wrong. **** happens... Like that messing with
temperature of sea water cold disable the "pump" that keeps the golf
stream going and start new glaciers in western europe that in turn would
spread en make the earth a slushy snowball...
--
teleportation kills

On Sun, 1 Jan 2017 05:27:18 -0800 (PST), RichA wrote:
:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming off the
: last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and will begin
: to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something like 8 of them,
: no reason to think that's over.

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

However, there is the uncomfortable example of Venus. It's not at all
far-fetched to conclude, as most reputable scientists do, that the reason
Venus is uninhabitable today is global warming due to the greenhouse effect.
It's a lesson we may choose to ignore at our peril.

Bob

In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming
: off the
: last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and will
: begin
: to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something like 8
: of them,
: no reason to think that's over.

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

it's very clear that there is no global cooling nor will there be any
time soon and that global warming may spell the end of life as we know
it.

for a timeline:
http://xkcd.com/1732/

RichA:
:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming
: off the last ice-age which is why it's warming...

The idiot gets it wrong yet again, preserving his perfect record. We
have ways of measuring the rate of warming and the rate since we began
pouring large quantities of particulates and CO2 into the atmosphere at
the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is unprecedented in geologic
time. The curves, warming vs. emission rates, match to an amazing
degree, pointing to one conclusion: human-caused global climate change.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On 1/5/2017 2:49 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming
: off the
: last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and will
: begin
: to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something like 8
: of them,
: no reason to think that's over.

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

it's very clear that there is no global cooling nor will there be any
time soon and that global warming may spell the end of life as we know
it.

for a timeline:
http://xkcd.com/1732/

It's quite an interesting timeline, but of course it does not actually
show any fine structure prior to 1900. And 20,000 years is a very short
period even for hominids.

And while a 7 metre sea level rise (melting of Greenland ice sheet) is
fairly dramatic, it doesn't really compare with the 125 metre rise
around 13,000 years ago, or the effect of two kilometers of ice on top
of Berlin and Birmingham.

On Thu, 05 Jan 2017 09:39:47 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jan 2017 05:27:18 -0800 (PST), RichA wrote:
:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming off the
: last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and will begin
: to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something like 8 of them,
: no reason to think that's over.

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

See
http://tinyurl.com/hhj7kcb or
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/...ut-the-winter/
which links via the NYT to a recent paper in 'The Lancet' which
discovered that cold weather is 17 times as bad as hot from the point
of human mortality.

However, there is the uncomfortable example of Venus. It's not at all
far-fetched to conclude, as most reputable scientists do, that the reason
Venus is uninhabitable today is global warming due to the greenhouse effect.
It's a lesson we may choose to ignore at our peril.

But the atmosphere of Venus is most unlike that of the earth (see
www.space.com/18526-venus-temperature.html ) Recent discoveries show
that the temperature of parts of Venus's atmosphere are way below that
of the earth's atmosphere. See
http://www.iflscience.com/space/deat...et-not-so-hot/
or http://tinyurl.com/hrm2ugl

Bob
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Thu, 05 Jan 2017 09:49:09 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming
: off the
: last ice-age which is why it's warming, or we've reached the peak and will
: begin
: to downslope from here so yes, a new ice age. We've had something like 8
: of them,
: no reason to think that's over.

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

it's very clear that there is no global cooling nor will there be any
time soon and that global warming may spell the end of life as we know
it.

********

for a timeline:
http://xkcd.com/1732/

That was constructed for the purpose of fooling children. Here is a
much more accurate representation constructed in answer to the first:
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpr..._timeline2.jpg
When you bring up the image click on it to bring it up to its full
size.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I quite agree. Despite the claims of "climate change" doomsayers, a strong
case can be made that global cooling is worse than global warming and that
if
human activity is forestalling the latter, that's a good thing.

it's very clear that there is no global cooling nor will there be any
time soon and that global warming may spell the end of life as we know
it.

********

nope.

for a timeline:
http://xkcd.com/1732/

That was constructed for the purpose of fooling children.

cite proof that was the goal.

Here is a
much more accurate representation constructed in answer to the first:
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpr..._timeline2.jpg
When you bring up the image click on it to bring it up to its full
size.

'peer reviewed cartoon' ???

seriously??

and it also shows a warming trend.

On Thu, 05 Jan 2017 10:40:05 -0500, Davoud wrote:

RichA:
:
: Global warmers can't have it both ways. Either the Earth is still coming
: off the last ice-age which is why it's warming...

The idiot gets it wrong yet again, preserving his perfect record. We
have ways of measuring the rate of warming and the rate since we began
pouring large quantities of particulates and CO2 into the atmosphere at
the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is unprecedented in geologic
time. The curves, warming vs. emission rates, match to an amazing
degree, pointing to one conclusion: human-caused global climate change.

1. Correspondence is not causation.

2. Apart for the last 60 years or so, atmospheric CO2 follows
temperatu CO2 fluctuations are not the cause of temperature
fluctuations.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens