RadioBanter - View Single Post - Time for the _REAL_ Radio Ham to make a stand?

December 28th 05, 09:33 AM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:

Spike wrote:
The fettled casting incident can be found here; pour yourself a scotch
or three and enjoy the tortured logic:

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.models.engineering/browse_thread/thread/ac866c5299fcd1aa/0cbfa48834da1d4a?lnk=st&q=blackgates+casting+group %3Auk.rec.models.engineering&rnum=2&hl=en#0cbfa488 34da1d4a

Absolutely hysterical, but I don't believe Gareth wrote any of that,
and here's why. In his regular drivelXXXXX sorry FAQ, he always writes:
"Ham Radio is a technical pursuit for those who are interested in the
science of radio wave propagation and who are also interested in the
way that their radios function. It has a long-standing tradition of
providing a source of engineers who are born naturals."

But the person who so publicly demonstrated his stupidity in that
thread stated from the outset: "Incidentally, it was not I who pointed
out the error, but a qualified engineer who was also thinking of buying
one"

Gareth, as we all know, is a "real radio ham", so why would he need to
get the opinion of a qualified engineer?

Could it be that he was out of his depth, and needed advice from
someone with experience? His approach to the FT-101E neutralising
problem was similar in that he got rid of the offending article. Come
to that, we haven't heard much about the FT-707 project either - but
at least he did ask for help with that, even if the replies were said
to have been lost due to one of his ISP failures.

from
Aero Spike