Mark McIntyre wrote
Rod Speed wrote
John L. Sielke wrote

Always amazinmg how when some people are proven wrong, the
revert to the "Is NOT, IS NOT," type of argument used by small
children, then when that doesn't work, the argument becomes irrelevant.

Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Rod, I suggest you LEARN something from your intellectual and
technical betters BEFORE you show the world your ignorance.

Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

While your original was technically correct, its completely
irrelevant to what was actually being discussed, WHETHER
THE RECEIVE ANTENNA EVER RADIATES ENOUGH TO
BE RELEVANT TO THE EIRP RESTRICTION.

I've not been following this thread, but I can tell you
straight off, I am significantly more inclined to believe
the guys who are not shouting and hurling abuse.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

What you may or may not be inclined to believe in spades.

Anyone with a clue considers the facts, not the style stuff, ****wit.

Make of that what you will,

I flush it where it belongs.

but my suggestion is to counter with rational
argument backed up by references and facts,

Dont need 'references' on that basic fact that even
when the receiving antenna does reradiate about
half of what it receives, THAT IS COMPLETELY
IRRELEVANT TO THE LEGISLATED ERIP LEVEL.

rather than insults and obscenities.

I suggest you take your stupid suggestion
and shove it up your arse, where it belongs.