Wear a MacDonalds outfit instead, if that's what makes you happy.

I find this show difficult to watch, because it seems to mock the people and groups I grew up with. I have since married and become a bit more "normal", giving up my D&D and video game habits. I do not like seeing my friends (and my self) mocked. I do not believe I have ever met people as lovely, self-effacing and generous as those called geeks.

Those would have been valuable questions to ask.

Because if it is, you need to pull your head out of your ass and go and do some extremely basic, cursory, research on the situation in the US. There are for sure some loud fundy Christian that like to whine about science, evolution in particular. However they have had little and less success in pushing their agenda and the US remains a powerful center of scientific research.

Trying to equate the US to ISIS is beyond stupid.

I'm pretty sure that I never mentioned anything about how old / new DD-WRT's software is. That said, the current version I'm running was released in June of this year.

You were saying?

FBI's penis recognition system has to receive its funding yet.

Are these comfortable suits cheaper than normal clothing from automated production lines that I find equally comfortable? If they aren't as cheap, what is the justification for suffering the increased cost? What utilitarian value are they going to bring? (And increased washing costs and smug feeling about wearing fancy dresses don't count.)

You could as well ask the opposite question: what's wrong with not wearing a suit?

Would that be satisfied with me wearing a pocket protector? :-p

Again, if they are "usual", there can't be anything wrong with them, so what's the problem with wearing those?

What are you talking about? We're talking about perspective here! This is not about object size, not even about object size in the picture. It is especially not about detail size because the topic is how the photo object changes when the camera distance changes while changing the focal length so that the details have exactly the same size.

As I said, go get a refresher on geometry.

I don't see how that is related to you being dumb. :-p

If your suit isn't comfortable, buy a nicer suit. A good suit is extremely comfortable.

Good news?

It's not happening, though. This year is really, really close to last year so it's more like a 2 year rebound from a new record low. If we're really lucky, 2012's minimum extent record will stand for a decade or longer. That would be good news for us, but I don't expect it to.

Using KH-11? ;-) It's close enough, anyway.

You've just publicly proven that you're a moron. Does that make you happy?

Based on your "logic", you don't. Otherwise you wouldn't be trying to hide something using perspective from across a room. You also nonsensically talk about "close-ups" when pictures of objects taken using lenses of different focal lengths can actually have the same dimension in the photos, with only the amount of perspective being different. Perhaps you need a refresher on geometry?

If I'm not mistaken, the parallax explanation would require a distance of the button side of no more than 35 cm from the lens' front principal plane. Doesn't it at least suggest that they tried fairly hard to consciously push the perspective? The usual 100mm macro lens would only be able to fit it in diagonally, I think.

Yeah, I'm sure the postdoc herself would prefer a somewhat more polished text.