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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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