"aunwin" wrote in message news:1Jv3c.510773$I06.5676239@attbi_s01...
This is great ! One benefit of standing up to the likes of you even tho it
is distastfull is that the more you write the more one can see who you
really are. You and others have trashed many people over the years and yes
nasty comments about jews and other antenna experts.

Art, that is just plain BS.

Heck didn't Walter just
finish trashing a guy about antennas. ( EH antennas was it)

No, he just pointed out the guy is full of BS.
Even Roy
Lewellen did the same thing until the tables turned on him and he left.

No, I suspect he got tired of beating his head against the wall trying
to expose BS.

Remember how you trashed Chip who talked about fractals,

He didn't trash Chip. He just pointed out that certain aspects of his
claims are basically BS. Actually, I think Steve Best was the leading
"thug" in this case.

then you trashed
some guy on EH antenas.

EH antennas? Do you think the claims applied to EH antennas are true?
Yes or no?

There was also the guy who advertises a two element antenna ,boy you really
trashed him and he left.

I don't know about this guy, but if he were trashed on this group,
there was probably a valid scientific basis for it.

Not sure why W8TI tom left tho I remember many
arguements that ensued regarding his article in QST that many disagreed
with.

I suspect same reason as Roy...Got tired of the brick marks on his
head from beating his head against the wall trying to expose BS.

None of these guys are left even tho they had a huge knowledge about
antennas

OK, you say these two guys have a huge knowledge base. "Which I agree
with"
What was the conclusion of their study of your antenna plans? Did you
agree with them? Or did you shun their advice, and claim they were
wrong? Yes or no will do.. This is not trick question.

so it must be galling to you that someone who you disagree with and
are trying to trash is still here, still going like a ever ready battery and
is standing up to you regarding a point of science and will not go away no
matter how much you wriggle and turn or try to paint derogatory things


No I suspect he thinks it's about as funny as I do. I actually live to
read your threads. Best source of entertainment since the comedy
channel.

. Believe me I will hold my ground against you no matter what flowery
language you constantly use which is really fractured english.

We don't doubt that. You do seem to have fortitude.

And the so
called experts can back you up as much as they want but I know that there
are people in this world
reading this thread who are wondering about their education.

And yours also I suspect.

Spouting from a book is not enough, if you cannot understand the basics from
which a formula is derived from then you are doomed
to repeat conclusions about impedance in areas where they don't apply and it
would appear that the so called experts are now fully exposed in the same
way they have tried to expose and trash others.

Right....Art, Richard Harrisons posts were quite clear to *most*. He
also provides references, which you seem to dislike for some reason.
You seem to dislike that he quotes from books often. Myself, I'm glad
he does. That way people can study the appropriate material and decide
for themselves.
The same applies to Richard Clarks posts. They were very clear to
*most*.
But you seem to believe his whole point of replying to *your*
questions was just another exercise of molesting poor ole
Art...Pitiful...

What goes around comes around. To imitate shakespeare
is not enough to present yourself as an expert in technical matters, even I
as a learner with respect to antennas can see that.

He obviously knows more than you do. In spades. But as a "learner
with respect to antennas", you insist on arguing with him and telling
him he's obviously full of BS. This could apply to many of the other
*vanished* posters also...
Do you see a pattern here?

What the World sees
regarding all the experts is for themselves to decide.

What do the "experts" have to do with it? The world only cares if the
antenna works as claimed or not.

The technical point at hand is quite clear and has been stated clearly in
this thread and I am absolutely positive that others outside of America
fully understands where you and others have gone wrong.

Right...

If it goes to print
it will be in RADCOM of the U.K. which has not been contaminated as yet like
QST and where I hope to supply names that are cherry picked who resist
anything new.

I don't resist anything new. I just resist anything new that is
obviuosly BS.
The EH antenna is a prime example. If you want to join this
illustrious group, be my guest. I won't cut you any more slack than I
do the EH guys. The end results won't be pretty. I imagine the EH guys
hate my guts being I dis their masterpiece of blunder. I would also
add deception, but like you and your *program*, I think they are
equally convinced what they have actually works as they claim.

That will not include you since you are not seen to be a
'name' in antennas but there are plenty of quotes left to draw upon
from the archives.

Maybe he should start selling "Clarksticks"....Would he be real to you
then?

Your turn Richard, keep writing as it can only be to my benefit
for people to see you for what you are.

Quite true...:/

So lets see....Who will have the funniest retort for me to read
tommorow morning?
I'm betting on you Art. Don't let me down.
Let the races begin....Ready, steady, GO!!!
MK