|
small antennas
Roy Lewallen wrote:
... Hope for what? Magic? The tradeoffs inherent in electrically small antennas are well known, and each design requires intelligent application of that knowledge to come up with an antenna that's acceptable in size, form factor, and performance for that particular use. Many, many antennas now being designed and ones in common use are electrically small -- the ones in your car's remote control key fob, your Bluetooth USB dongle or cell phone earpiece, and embedded in RFID tags are just a very few examples. With the increasing use of wireless devices, the need for electrically small antennas has grown rapidly, and there are a number of good texts devoted to that specific topic. These texts contain a good treatment of the tradeoffs involved and useful ideas for designs using currently available technology and materials, but no new fundamental theory. Advancements in the art will continue to come with intelligent and clever application of established theory by people who understand the theory and how to apply it, not from tinkerers who lack this knowledge and conjure their miracles by vague hand-waving and bad measurement. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Ahh, the "magic man" himself is here ... the guy who write a simplistic interface to feed a text file to the real NEC engine ... My gawd man, carry on, we await you wisdom ... smiling-out-the-one-side-of-ones'-face With all DUE respect, JS |
small antennas
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:53:54 -0700, John Smith
wrote: In this instance, I said what I meant, and meant what I said, and You're popeye the sailor man. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It would seem a self styled code wizard would know how to cut and paste the code he objects too for all to see. Unless, of course, assembly wizard means someone who folds cardboard into boxes. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:40:38 -0700, John Smith wrote: Brett, what a feeble way to support your own statements. Above you say you already have the code and have located a bit... Your dog ate your homework? all that is left is to point out Plenty of wheezing, but not a whisper of support for your own statement. WHACK-A-TROLL! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC I am going to tell you, once and for all. I have tolerated your limited mind, I have overlooked your shortcomings, I have treated you like you belong ... you do not. You have repaid this with being obnoxious, ignorant, short on anything relevant to the arguments, discussions, and debates here ... You fall one brick short of a full load ... if you were going to demonstrate better, you would have done so by now ... I really refrain from this, and save it to the last ... however, you have squarely requested it ... and I have granted it. Be damned with what you have invoked ... and may it fulfill what you seem to desire ... if I am the only one to recognize this, then so be it. Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:53:54 -0700, John Smith wrote: In this instance, I said what I meant, and meant what I said, and You're popeye the sailor man. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It would seem a self styled code wizard would know how to cut and paste the code he objects too for all to see. Unless, of course, assembly wizard means someone who folds cardboard into boxes. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC I have but one work you are consigned to ... ignorant ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:40:38 -0700, John Smith wrote: Brett, what a feeble way to support your own statements. Above you say you already have the code and have located a bit... Your dog ate your homework? all that is left is to point out Plenty of wheezing, but not a whisper of support for your own statement. WHACK-A-TROLL! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Or, to summarize, these spires are not for you to roost upon and defecate upon, they are for you to shooed away from! Begone, oh pigeon brained! (and Shakespeare would even know that!) Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:53:54 -0700, John Smith wrote: In this instance, I said what I meant, and meant what I said, and You're popeye the sailor man. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It would seem a self styled code wizard would know how to cut and paste the code he objects too for all to see. Unless, of course, assembly wizard means someone who folds cardboard into boxes. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC However, now that I have expounded and embraced my utter disgust and disrespect for you, and so tarnished yourself, let me continue; you are one of the most ignorant men I have had the displeasure of encountering in this hobby! You stand as very notable, but to degrees most men find despicable. You have, indeed, made yourself notable to me; I can only wish to fathom why you would have chosen such dark, questionable and detestable means to do so? If your "good ole' buddies have a word to say for you, now would be the time ... I fear I feel like engaging all you like ... YOUR IGNORANCE DOES NOT PASS MY SCRUTINY ... but then, that is what you wanted ... for what purpose? Perhaps you can enlighten? Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 00:14:22 -0700, John Smith
wrote: It would seem a self styled code wizard would know how to cut and paste the code he objects too for all to see. Unless, of course, assembly wizard means someone who folds cardboard into boxes. However, now that I have expounded and embraced my utter disgust It is a curious thread. You have made any number of very clear propositions offering testable statements, and you can't supply the least scintilla of evidence, example, case, illustration, instance, representative, sample, or specimen in their support. Well maybe a cupful of specimen where, no doubt, this last comment of yours runneth over. Brett, if your own statements lead you to such embraceable disgust (what a concept), imagine how others perceive them. :-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message treetonline... Sal M. Onella wrote:. snip If all the money the Air Force could throw at a problem didn't come up with some magic, do we have a lot of hope??? Hope for what? Magic? snip By "magic" I meant the development of technology that was heretofore unidentified, not some false illusion by a conjurer. I agree with the essential need for "clever application of established theory ... [etc]" as you so eloquently stated. In that sense, the IC was magic. (Sorry if I seem to liken technology too much to magic.) |
small antennas
On Oct 5, 10:28*pm, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: "Roy Lewallen" wrote in message treetonline... Sal M. Onella wrote:. snip If all the money the Air Force could throw at a problem didn't come up with some magic, do we have a lot of hope??? Hope for what? Magic? snip By "magic" I meant the development of technology that was heretofore unidentified, not some false illusion by a conjurer. * *I agree with the essential need for "clever application of established theory ... [etc]" * as you so eloquently stated. In that sense, the IC was magic. *(Sorry if I seem to liken technology too much to magic.) If the USAF crew all read the same books before their journey then they all had the same experience many times over. What it takes is imagination and the will to deviate from the well trodden paths where different experiences and views empower men to challenge the old based on experiences that others have not travelled. It then takes a generation for those that failed and snarled at the new to leave the scene so that later research turns up the more recent past and thus reinvents the wheel. Einstien left classical physics because he could not find the key for the Universal laws and probed into the science of relativity purely to gain a different perspective or view of the former problem which required a move away from the well trodden path to get the answer. Unfortunately he died before finding the answer but was on the right track in not assuming that all was known because of the high number of failures before him who all trod the same path and arrived at the same destination. |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
... Brett, if your own statements lead you to such embraceable disgust (what a concept), imagine how others perceive them. :-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Makes you wonder what Einstein might have said on the subject, doesn't it? "A spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man." -- Albert Einstein Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:29:55 -0700, John Smith
wrote: Brett, if your own statements lead you to such embraceable disgust (what a concept), imagine how others perceive them. :-) Makes you wonder what Einstein might have said on the subject, doesn't it? Wondering about the thoughts of dead white men over your abandoned topic is like validation shopping in the graveyard. Now, can you in fact support your statement NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" with that actual bit of code (a labeled block)? Or has your theoretical vacuum merely confirmed another attempted grave robbery? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:29:55 -0700, John Smith wrote: Brett, if your own statements lead you to such embraceable disgust (what a concept), imagine how others perceive them. :-) Makes you wonder what Einstein might have said on the subject, doesn't it? Wondering about the thoughts of dead white men over your abandoned topic is like validation shopping in the graveyard. Now, can you in fact support your statement NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" with that actual bit of code (a labeled block)? Or has your theoretical vacuum merely confirmed another attempted grave robbery? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Interesting you would move to slight this "dead man"; makes one anticipate much from your, yet to be displayed, display of mental prowess ... keep us waiting no longer man! We wait with bated breath! yawn Oh wait, that must have been a "Shakespearian Slip!" (closely related to the famous Freudian Slip ... I guess chuckle) Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
... 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC On second thought, your post reminds me, more, of a womans' slip showing .... I mean, taking for granted, one did not wish to expose what has been exposed in the event. Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
... 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Or, to summarize, you would trash great minds in your personal pursuits to institute a personal attack ... now that it has been pointed out to you, blatantly, your vision has probably improved. But then, one would have to look behind ones self, occasionally for that to be of use ... which brings to mind, "Fools rush in where brave men fear to tread." Or, something like that ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 06:08:25 -0700, John Smith
wrote: Now, can you in fact support your statement NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" with that actual bit of code (a labeled block)? Or has your theoretical vacuum merely confirmed another attempted grave robbery? Interesting you would move to slight this "dead man" Not interesting at all. Thank you for confirming your topic's demise from its intellectual poverty. It was a quick death, after all - a stillbirth considering its antecedent. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
... Not interesting at all. Thank you for confirming your topic's demise from its intellectual poverty. It was a quick death, after all - a stillbirth considering its antecedent. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Oh you noticed; for someone to have an intelligent conversation with you, you would first have to say something intelligent. I tell you, I can't tell if there is real hope, still, for you, or not .... I won't tell you which way I am leaning, it might influence the outcome. ROFLOL Anyway, you are always good for a laugh. Regards, JS |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
... Not interesting at all. Thank you for confirming your topic's demise from its intellectual poverty. It was a quick death, after all - a stillbirth considering its antecedent. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Anyway, as usual, you missed the point. The "silence" you are pointing out is the sound of everyone firing up their favorite antenna modeling software, such as MMANA-GAL, then realizing they are actually going to have to construct something to get complete data ... However, I can almost hear your thoughts, don't bother stating them; I will state them for you, "Now how do you like that JS? I am your worst nightmare!" -- Just before the room fills with laughter ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:11:24 -0700, John Smith
wrote: Not interesting at all. Thank you for confirming your topic's demise from its intellectual poverty. It was a quick death, after all - a stillbirth considering its antecedent. Oh you noticed A corpse is a corpse - of course, of course; and no one would talk to corpse, of course; unless, of course, that corpse was the famous Mr. Dead! for someone to have an intelligent conversation with you, you would first have to say something intelligent. And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:11:24 -0700, John Smith wrote: Not interesting at all. Thank you for confirming your topic's demise from its intellectual poverty. It was a quick death, after all - a stillbirth considering its antecedent. Oh you noticed A corpse is a corpse - of course, of course; and no one would talk to corpse, of course; unless, of course, that corpse was the famous Mr. Dead! for someone to have an intelligent conversation with you, you would first have to say something intelligent. And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Voodoo science exists within the NEC code, the cat is out of the bag, end of story ... of course, you are a "flat-earther", that changes everything in your imaginary world ... and, due to near-sighted-vision, will remain there, for you ... Not only that, you now wish to take your imaginary vision into realms where you are without grounds to go ... download the code, compile, link and debug ... or else, get out yer' knitting needles and join the women in the other room ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:16:39 -0700, John Smith
wrote: And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" Voodoo science exists within the NEC code Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling prosodies. To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
On Oct 6, 8:16*am, John Smith wrote:
Richard Clark wrote: ... 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC On second thought, your post reminds me, more, of a womans' slip showing ... I mean, taking for granted, one did not wish to expose what has been exposed in the event. Regards, JS John, do me a favour and re read Richards last 5 or 10 posts and then ask yourself Did Richard provide any thing to you that was usefull? He will only supply querstions so that he can belittle those that try to answer. He himself will never supply anything that is seen as profitablke to this group at large. If the last 12 postings doesn't satisfy you then look at the last 25, or 50 postings. There is no likely hood that he is going to change after spending several years taking this tack to annoy people on this group. So why respond to him which only satisfies his quest of being belonged as a person some where in this World. He is lonely, he is without friends and just an obnoxious person seeking a conversation with anybody and I mean anybody that he can rope in and annoy just to extend the length of the conversation so he has a sense of belonging. So John look at his past postings and ask yourself is any conversation with Richard worth while and then take the appropiate action. He can then turn to KB9RQZ to satisfy his needs without disruption to the rest of us and where he will find a true friend with similar tastes. Best regard Art |
small antennas
Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 6, 8:16 am, John Smith wrote: Richard Clark wrote: ... 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC On second thought, your post reminds me, more, of a womans' slip showing ... I mean, taking for granted, one did not wish to expose what has been exposed in the event. Regards, JS John, do me a favour and re read Richards last 5 or 10 posts and then ask yourself Did Richard provide any thing to you that was usefull? He will only supply querstions so that he can belittle those that try to answer. So much fun to read though. I never miss a post. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
small antennas
On Oct 4, 2:12*pm, John Smith wrote:
NM5K wrote: Yes. But they deal with the real world, not a bunch of conjered up voodoo science. Funny you should mention that. *As, when you peek closely under the hood of the NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science", IMHO ... Can you believe that? This guy is claiming that the method of moments is voodoo science! I wonder what is peek under the hood was. What books did he read? Can he still read books? It's twight time... Only people with limited room are likely to be interesting in accepting a decrease in performance, vs using full size antennas. The only place you see me using small antennas on HF Don't forget us guys who are over 50 and getting tired of maintaining large hunks of metal in the sky and fighting the force of gravity Gods to do so (in more ways than one! * Not to mention those fierce ether winds. And, not to mention neighbors, rules, regulations, etc.) *With the price of real estate being manipulated near "Hong Kong Prices" (what is that, about a million dollars a sq. ft.?), I guess "John" has not heard about the real estate crash. reduced size antennas will only increase in uses and demand ... That is true because the microwave portions of the spectrum is becoming so pervasive. But not HF. Regards, JS Sigh....another senility eruption takes its course. |
small antennas
On Oct 6, 7:19*pm, wrote:
On Oct 4, 2:12*pm, John Smith wrote: NM5K wrote: Yes. But they deal with the real world, not a bunch of conjered up voodoo science. Funny you should mention that. *As, when you peek closely under the hood of the NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science", IMHO ... Can you believe that? This guy is claiming that the method of moments is voodoo science! I wonder what is peek under the hood was. What books did he read? Can he still read books? It's twight time... Only people with limited room are likely to be interesting in accepting a decrease in performance, vs using full size antennas. The only place you see me using small antennas on HF Don't forget us guys who are over 50 and getting tired of maintaining large hunks of metal in the sky and fighting the force of gravity Gods to do so (in more ways than one! * Not to mention those fierce ether winds. And, not to mention neighbors, rules, regulations, etc.) *With the price of real estate being manipulated near "Hong Kong Prices" (what is that, about a million dollars a sq. ft.?), I guess "John" has not heard about the real estate crash. reduced size antennas will only increase in uses and demand ... That is true because the microwave portions of the spectrum is becoming so pervasive. But not HF. Regards, JS Sigh....another senility eruption takes its course. John could well be correct as certain assumed conditions(assumptions) were set over and above Maxwell's laws prior to the program being computed ! These programs are generally used to determine the functions of planar antennas and the like that do NOT meet the conditions implied in Maxwell's laws. One condition implicite in all the laws of the masters is that Newtons laws with respect to equilibrium must be observed, which rules out such arrangements as the Yagi. This is not to say that Maxwell's laws are used incorrectly in antenna programs,only that it is usually used outside its intended usage where acountability of all vectors are not accounted for, which thus provides aproximations Close enough for horse shoes and lemmings but not for the pursuit of science along the lines intended by Newton and others. Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:16:39 -0700, John Smith wrote: And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" Voodoo science exists within the NEC code Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling prosodies. To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and all that ... Have you presented material since the 1960's for us to preview ... no, no it seems you have not ... Have you presented any pertinent data which would catch ones interest, no, no you have not ... Have you presented any antennas which cannot be found in 1960's or prior articles, papers or books, no, no you have not ... Have, you presented ANY areas which have not been gone over 1000 times .... no, no you have not .... Have you been a pain in the arse, demanding attention to your mutterings, claiming importance to your mutterings, well, yes, yes you have done that ... YOU HAVE DONE THAT, UNFORTUANTLY! Other than the bedrock of antenna literature, what have you to offer? What do you have to say that we cannot find in a book by one of your favorite gurus? What new have you offered, since, like say 1960? Richard, if you are going to invoke minds such as Cecils', such as Roys', such as Walters', such as many would were writing articles when I was an adolescent--could you not reach down and offer just a bit more .... I mean, if it is within your reach ... ROFLOL No, no you cannot, however, surprise me ... it has happened before ... perhaps you have saved the best for last ... or, is all you have to offer more butt kissing of those who have gone before? Sad, so very sad, but then, you already know that and have prostituted all your mental prowess getting here ... imagine-a-tear-in-each-of-my-eyes May Heaven provide you with better ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
Art Unwin wrote:
... Best regard Art You mean, AND THEN, notice the poor *(%^&$(*^*()& b*st*rd pokes fun at you? Art, don't doubt me buddy, I have noticed! However, Art, "You are a bit 'out there' even for me ... " wink But, as always, the shade which could be pulled--remains open ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
Art Unwin wrote:
... Best regard Art Art: I have a weird sense of humor ... But, "Poor Richard" (and NOT the invention of Franklin) has found the end of that ... please forgive my bad behavior, my mother would scold me, if she seen my past posts ... but then, she never enjoyed my enjoyment of a good drink either (she is a total tea totaler) GRIN Regards, JS |
small antennas
|
small antennas
Art Unwin wrote:
... John could well be correct as certain assumed conditions(assumptions) were set over and above Maxwell's laws prior to the program being computed ! These programs are generally used to determine the functions of planar antennas and the like that do NOT meet the conditions implied in Maxwell's laws. One condition implicite in all the laws of the masters is that Newtons laws with respect to equilibrium must be observed, which rules out such arrangements as the Yagi. This is not to say that Maxwell's laws are used incorrectly in antenna programs,only that it is usually used outside its intended usage where acountability of all vectors are not accounted for, which thus provides aproximations Close enough for horse shoes and lemmings but not for the pursuit of science along the lines intended by Newton and others. Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ Art: With so many fools (indians?) after my scalp, I am lucky to remain on the square I occupy ... these fools attempt to drag us back to dark ages ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Oct 6, 9:24*pm, John Smith wrote:
Art Unwin wrote: * ... Best regard Art Art: I have a weird sense of humor ... But, "Poor Richard" (and NOT the invention of Franklin) has found the end of that ... please forgive my bad behavior, my mother would scold me, if she seen my past posts ... but then, she never enjoyed my enjoyment of a good drink either (she is a total tea totaler) GRIN Regards, JS John, I have not read anything over the last two years regarding the M.O.M / NEC Can you give me a smigeon of information of what is being said of such programs? There was mention of such in a ARRL compendium a few years back that made mention of the assumption made on the continuity of an applied sine wave which conflicts I believe with the Tank Circuit equivalent. And ofcourse some programs do better with respect to proximity effect better than others, but I have never seen anything of major content. I do know that all four forces of the standard model are included in such programs however they are rarely utelised since they are not really understood in the present state of the art. Regards Art |
small antennas
Art Unwin wrote:
... John, I have not read anything over the last two years regarding the M.O.M / NEC Can you give me a smigeon of information of what is being said of such programs? There was mention of such in a ARRL compendium a few years back that made mention of the assumption made on the continuity of an applied sine wave which conflicts I believe with the Tank Circuit equivalent. And ofcourse some programs do better with respect to proximity effect better than others, but I have never seen anything of major content. I do know that all four forces of the standard model are included in such programs however they are rarely utelised since they are not really understood in the present state of the art. Regards Art Art: Actually, Roy, or one (or all the hams) engaged in writing an interface to the NEC engine (MMANA-GAL and 'those guys' -- do an internet search, their emails are readily available), which frees us from having to enter the actual numerical data into a text file, would be much better gurus ... As you know, I am much more interested it what we can't see, at the moment -- the either ... Art, I have as many questions as you ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:13:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote: Richard Clark wrote: And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" Voodoo science exists within the NEC code Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling prosodies. To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)! Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and all that ... No you don't. This maudlin appeal is weak tea, save it for Authur who shares your disability in lack of originality. I do applaud the parade of the lame and lazy excuses you two manage to bluff up in the guise of outrage. What a hoot! Insisting others to prove your claims has to rank up there on the honor roll of welfare queens. If the Congress had a bailout for ineptitude (and it has been fairly proven they do), they would have granted you earmarks for your mutual admiration society diary entries. You guys scribble out those tear stained pages like they earn tax credits. Weep on! The election cycle still has 30 days of promises to be made to the technically indigent. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard,
Calling people 'name' here is fairly common place. But making comparison to politician is just plain nasty! - 'Doc |
small antennas
|
small antennas
|
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:13:27 -0700, John Smith wrote: Richard Clark wrote: And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve over your gumming through NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to), it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science" Voodoo science exists within the NEC code Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling prosodies. To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)! Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and all that ... No you don't. This maudlin appeal is weak tea, save it for Authur who shares your disability in lack of originality. I do applaud the parade of the lame and lazy excuses you two manage to bluff up in the guise of outrage. What a hoot! Insisting others to prove your claims has to rank up there on the honor roll of welfare queens. If the Congress had a bailout for ineptitude (and it has been fairly proven they do), they would have granted you earmarks for your mutual admiration society diary entries. You guys scribble out those tear stained pages like they earn tax credits. Weep on! The election cycle still has 30 days of promises to be made to the technically indigent. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ... I have suggested it in my text to you, consider my text summarized with the simple statement. Besides, you are a long-winded-blow-hard ... you remind me of the guy who I just walk away from my rig, come back ten minutes later, with a cup of coffee, and wait a long time for him to finish ... a long wait, most likely ... :-( Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:36:36 -0700, John Smith
wrote: OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ... Boy, self contradiction in the space of a breath. That, or we are into parsing. What kind have you been? Talk about gassing on, the two of you could be the solution to the energy crisis if we could just get you guys off the endangered wheezers list. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:36:36 -0700, John Smith wrote: OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ... Boy, self contradiction in the space of a breath. That, or we are into parsing. What kind have you been? Talk about gassing on, the two of you could be the solution to the energy crisis if we could just get you guys off the endangered wheezers list. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum you have given me to present mine ... Regards, JS |
small antennas
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:02:49 -0700, John Smith
wrote: I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum you have given me to present mine ... The instructions for bailing out in a parachute suggests you pull the ripcord BEFORE you hit the ground. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
small antennas
Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:02:49 -0700, John Smith wrote: I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum you have given me to present mine ... The instructions for bailing out in a parachute suggests you pull the ripcord BEFORE you hit the ground. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Richard: Look out the door of your plane ... it never left ground ... Regards, JS |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com