"Derek" wrote in message
...
On Jan 19, 9:41 pm, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"Derek" wrote:
Are we to take it you regard Art's claim's for his 160m antenna
to be a fraud?

So far neither the performance of Art's 160-m antenna, nor the claims he
makes for its underlying physics have been publicly proven by scientific
method.

So should he produce his antenna and showed that is was all he
claimed you would not accept it because it would not have been proven
by "scientific" methods to you.
The fact that it work's would count for nothing?. That's weard.

Derek

i have a very small 160m antenna that 'works'. How well art's antenna
works, and in his case, the more important question is how he can prove or
demonstrate to someone that the cosmic equilibrium static particles that
levitate from it when he uses it are the real questions.