On 11/21/2014 8:54 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 8:13 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 5:06 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 12:45 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

You know enough to copy and paste a chart. That's all. You have no
idea *what the chart shows*.

That sounds a lot like a straw man argument to me and you repeatedly
refuse to address what it is that the chart does show.

Those are two traits of a real troll.

snip


I've tried explaining it to you in the past. But you discard any
attempts at proof I provide. So don't try to tell me I haven't provided
any proof.

All you have provided as proof is "I got a WAS" which is NOT proof
of antenna performance.




It is more proof that you have that your figures are wrong!

A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.

And actual propagation reports are more accurate than theoretical charts.

A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.


This right here shows you how wrong you are.

But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.


But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.

If you want REAL propagation reports with REAL numbers, than use
http://pskreporter.info/pskmap.html



LOL, you refuse to accept REAL reports because they contradict your
fantasies.

A REAL report would be what you get from pskreporter which has numbers
coming from a computer based measurement in dB, not just some guy saying
"59".

So, tell me. If my antenna "sucked", how did I work Alaska and Hawaii
from Iowa? In fact, how did I work California and Massachusetts?
According to you, it should have been impossible because my antenna
"sucked".

I have never said anything is impossible; you are delusional.



So you say that reports of a strong signal all over the state prove your
theory - but reports from all over the world are worthless because they
are not "propagation reports". IOW, reports which support your
fantasies are fine, but those which do no support your theories don't
count. Talk about selective bias!

And no - you didn't say it was impossible. But I still challenge you to
show how I could do that if my antenna "sucked". After all - it was
just an inverted VEE, apex at 50', ends basically at ground level.
According to you, I shouldn't have been able to work farther than Omaha.
Yet I worked both coasts virtually every night in the winter time.

So tell me, how could such an antenna that "sucks" according to your own
words, work?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================