Posts Made By: Andrew Settimio

I have a APO Lens Set. It's from a extremly large enlarger.

There are 4 len sets in cells. There from a company called
Geortz out of NY. or something like that. The largest
2.8" and the smallest is about a 1".

How do find out how to determine a fair price?

Anyone jumping in on the Seibert Premium Binoviewer deal?
They certainly seem to be clone of Denkmier. I already own
a XT clone which is really nice for 30% less. What could be the difference?

Nothing wrong with taking advantage of a little VAR price war!

The binoviewers that are made by OEM's for resale in the US, How does this work? Are the parts shipped from the US and assembled in Asia?, The other way around? Only certain parts manufactured here, while the other parts are manufactured elsewhere and then built there?

I have a XT10 clone that came in boxes that had the same color scheme as my Orion box's without the name.
A argument was made that there is a Orion pile where the best are placed, and a pile for everyone else. I doubt it, but who knows?

It seems like the quality control issues would be tough to determine if your own VAR specs were being followed. I mean,
maybe they put there #1 guy on your stuff and the #2,#3 or #4 guy on everyone elses.

While the immediate issue for me is OEM's and binoviewers, do they all act the same when it comes to Telescopes & Telescope accesories? Some units are the same between VAR's. Orion,Celestron,BW,Denkmier,University Optics......
Some do share OEM's with there particular product.

I have a XT Clone. To make my views better should I..

- Get a better secondary that 96% reflective.

- Get a different secondary that is 5% smaller.

88% reflective primary, 88% reflective secondary = 77% Total
88% reflective primary 96% reflective secondary = 84% Total

I'm guessing the secondary is 88% reflective, it maybe less.

Trying to keep up grade around $100.

Everyone,

I probably jumped the gun. There is a awful amount of noise
out there and I should not have contributed to it. Maybe I should look inside my own reply a little deeper. I'm no Sibert disiple, own nothing of his, but I am on his list for the premium deal for the time being.

My goal, is see If you can purchase a Binosystem,
Telescope, assesories, and E.P. for less then $1000, and have a enjoyable system. I think I can, and well see. I've already spent more money then needed and for less bang then I recieved in this hobby in general. Within a few months, one way or another I'll plan on letting people know if I succeeded, and to what degree.

I"m sorry for any ditractions or alienations.

Planetary only

I like the long focal lenght of the CAS design for
low power E.P. "el natural"(No Barlow)

The spot size & small CO of the MAK-Newt. Many say the best
planetary.

The aperature of the 9.25 SCT for more detail.

Which to chose.........................

Kinda upset at our so-called Allies.The French, Germans and Russians. I Believe they are trying to prevent erosion
of thier Political/Economic Influence and slow the American Economic/Political Machine from having a stonger impact on the world, espically where it directly competes with there own interests. No matter how evil the result is.

I own 3 russian Scopes and exspensive equipment from Ziess. My next purchase was a Planetary scope. a MAk-Newt was in the forefront, a Russian MAK a close second. Even
Markus Ludes was in the running for the purchase but I was leaning towards ITE.

So in my scope purchasing decsision. I'm really thinking about dropping these guys from the short list. Espically
buying a Russian scope from a German distributor. I believe
in the concept of Globilzation, but man, I'm really upset.

The French lack any productd worth buying, so can't cause much damage there.

It looks like a 9.25 SCT for planetary viewing for me.

Am I over reacting?

It is intersting that one of the premeisis in developing a missle intercept program back in the 80's and before(60'?), was to prevent accidental missle launches or small scale attacks from minor rougue nations. 20 years later we are at the door steps of such scenerios.

What do the nay-sayers say now that the issue is thrust upon us? I'm not sure if something is close to being ready, but it was not emphised in the Clinton Adminstration, though he did feel it had some reasearch value.

N. Korea may soon me able to threaten N. Americas west coast, while there is no defense mechanism, with any chance of success, now in place.

Europeans, did not want us to develope it and have been some of the biggest critics. They felt it would start a arms race. We are now laid bare, as coffee shop experts scenerioes become a new reality. A youge generation must live in fear at the hands of a power hungry oppressor.

Here's the UN Declaration of Human rights.

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Sounds Very Good. Gee the UN solves everything.

Why are most the worlds population not allowed to practice these things? Why are there so many oppressed. All the nations belonging to the UN have sworn to uphold these things.

Maybe it has to with Article 29, section 3. Since these are not practice by so many goverments , espically those that stand against the USA, it must be because if these oppressed people were allowed to practice these freedoms, it would interfere with "the purpose and principles of the United Nations." What is the real UN pupose?

The US constitution has no such exception.

I have enjoyed my discussion with you all. Hope non has been hit to personal. I personally have thick skin.

I do not believe science has all the physical answers, nor do I see it as static. Same with relgion. We all have aparadime that dictates what we accept and deny, and what is the basis for our augments. I like examining mine.

I'm a christian Deist, who does not beleive the bible is the word of God, and loosly constrain God. Therefore some of the arguments were irrelevant. Don't expect me to defend the bible or anyone elses sacred text as a science book, (or there beliefs). I also recognize the obvious.

To say science is not a relgious element is one thing and I can agree to that, but to say it does not require faith, is erronious.

Those who wish to use science to desribe human behavior and
the universe will not succed completely. Obviously those who will deny science and use only religion, will not be as good at finding oil, minerals, have GPS and the like.

There are many parralles in scientific and religious development, I'm anti-Saganist in that I believe they are compatable and converging.

I will try and resond to any more issues, but I will be tied up in the next few days, and these issues move almost too quick for me to answer as it is. So if I'm quiet for a while, don't think I've given up.