K4YZ wrote:
D. Stussy wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, K4YZ wrote:
D. Stussy wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, K4YZ wrote:
D. Stussy wrote:
Regardless, there are two things being varied: The
mark/space
condition, and
the duration of each, so there is no way that morse code
can
be
binary.
Sure it can.
But the REAL question is how can we blame it on Bill
Pasternak
and
threaten to sue him over it.....?!?!
Steve, K4YZ
The very comment above is absolute proof of Steve Robeson's
stupidity.
How's that, Dieter?
Which word was beyond your understanding? Everyone else clearly
understood my
statement about your [lack of] mental ability. There is no
ambiguity.
But I am not the one with the probelm, Dieter!
You've led a years long campaign to smear a man who does nothing
but good things for Amateur Radio then claim others have "mental
ability" problems.
Getting tired of making stupid assertions in public then
getting
your nose rubbed in it?
I haven't made any stupid assertions.
Sure you have.
At least three years of smears, deceit and blatant lies about
Bill
Paternak and Amateur Radio Newsline,
I have made only one conclusion - and you have failed to provide
any
evidence
(let alone credible evidence) that even hints that my conclusion is
wrong.
Since there are TWO things being varied, there is a minimum of four
states, and
thus code cannot be binary (two states). QED, asshole.
You seem to have the mental problems, Dieter.
I wasn't addressing the binary states (or lack of) of accurately
sent Morse Code.
I was addressing your Quixotie-like crusade style.
As for who's the...well...You know...I guess it's the person who
can't express himself without profanity.
QED, Dieter.
You're a putz.
Steve, K4YZ
|