Wes Stewart wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:44:12 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

[snip]
|
|Perhaps you should argue this with
|Dr. Ken Asmus, VA3KA , a scientist who
|conducted a shoot-out in Canada...

I'm sure that Dr. Asmus is a fine fellow, all-around good guy and he
no longer beats his wife. But the minute I hear, "the RB-36x was 1-2
S units stronger", science has gone out the window and bafflegab has
blown in.

Wes,

You demean a scientist merely to
feed your perverted ego and maintain
your narrow-minded preconceptions?

Where is the intellectual honesty in
that? Where is the science in that?

You demonstrate the only kind of
science you support is that which
confirms your silly preconceptions,
despite reality.

Which would imply, had the
comparison gone the other way,
you'd have accepted that data
unquestioned.

Hypocrisy has no standing in real
science.


[snip]
|
|It seems inconsistent that you repeatedly
|cry "unsubstantiated" then refuse to
|consider substance. Though I suppose
|if you bothered to check out the contest
|records, it may raise havoc with your
|unsubstantiated opinions, perhaps?... hi

Contest records are not "substance."

Comparative measurements on a calibrated antenna range would be
substance. I will consider them.

Since you've established that your
mind is an impenetrable brick, I'd
venture to say you'd reject test
range data outright, if it failed to
meet your silly preconceptions.

Do you still live in Tucson? Just
a 100 miles south of me...

If so, I invite you to consider this:

Let me know the next time you're
on 17m... I'd be happy to blow your
silly 3 el yagi away with my measly
2 elements...

Have a nice...

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI

SK

N7WS