"aunwin" wrote in message news:RE66c.33727$po.297044@attbi_s52...
Mark you should have no room for complaints.

Who's complaining? I could really give a rats ass about you or your
antenna....

I offered you unhindered access
to my work including the computor programing system which I would purchase
at my own expense together with the programing I used to substantiated my
findings.

Why do I need yours? I have many programs. They all pretty much do the
same thing.

You refused that offer prefering to stay with the pack and
ridicule all.

I only ridicule horsecrap Art. I asked the guy a simple frigging
question..
WTF are you going to do, that his money is on? So far, he hasn't
answered. I don't think he knows. If that is ridicule,that just too
damn bad isn't it...What a whiny ass old fart you are, Art.

You have had access to the patent write ups many times as they
have been brought forward many times by members to serve at a ridicule
point and all you had to do was to click on what was supplied.

Are you talking about the rube goldberg looking thing? I've seen it...
They also
found a very old page that I had describing the loop/dipole antenna together
with the drawings and you are still complaining.

Complaining my ass.

I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work

Bull****, Art. Plain and simple.

but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,

They pretty much all use the same basic engines...

and you are still complaining ,

Again, bite me Art. Complaining my ass. You just wait till I'm REALLY
complaining you frigging fool. Don't screw with me. You **** me off,
and I WILL be your worst frigging nightmare. I'll stick to you like
dried turd particles on a baby's ass. Everything you say that is BS, I
will comment on. Is that what you really want? As is it, I only
comment on about 50% of it...

and now you bring up a drawing that you say
you put before me even tho you had the option of looking at the many
drawings available.

Art, you frigging fool, that is the picture from the modeling program
itself. I sent it to you. You looked at it, and ok'ed it.
I just looked at the drawing that you proffer and I defy
anybody to look at that and know what it represents.

Jeeze...What a frigging idiot you are, Art.

Time and time again I
tried to make peace with you but you chose to tag along with those who have
attacked many contributors in the past since they have a long winning record
in ousting many others.

No Art. I won't kiss your ass. Tag along? Tag along with whom? WTF are
you talking about?

You decided on your nest a long time ago

My nest? Crap....
so you really have no reason to complain as you still have your cohorts
around you that tend to belittle all.

Bite me Art. I could give a flying #$%^ what the others say or think.
That includes you, you old fart.

Your crying now falls on deaf ears.

You'll think crying...
Nuff said

Yea, I think so....
'Good day' I think he said
Art

Yea, later Art. MK

(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

On reflection, I guess I got a little testy with Art. But he provoked
me...
But I do apologize for the somewhat nasty comments.. But, I do not
suffer fools well.
Anyone can look in google, and read the threads themselves. When I
modeled that antenna, I nearly had to jump through hoops to get an
accurate description, but I finally got his ok, as all can read. I
modeled the thing exactly as he described, eventually, and the results
did not agree with his ideas. What was his only comment to the whole
ordeal and modeling exercise?

"quote"
"Good for you Mark! You have done a lot of good work on it' and you
got
so close.
So we put you down for " it won't work as stated,"Your opinion is as
good as any and you are not beating around the bush or hedging
Have a great week end
Art"

Unquote...

Note the "you came so close"....ONLY if I had results that agreed with
his, whole the results have been final. The results of the modeling
did not suit him, so he had no further comment. I see no claim above
that I "butchered" the model or diagram of the 20m dipole involved.
Only in the beginning, when I doubled the size to 40m. This was before
his thread "a tutorial", so I had no way of knowing what band he
wanted.

The links to the threads involved can be read at these URLS. They link
to my search, but will read the whole threads.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection. Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

On 18 Mar 2004 08:29:07 -0800, (Mark Keith) wrote:

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection.

Hi Mark,

What a novel concept! ...but then that would be the end of it and we
could roll the rock back over the sepulcher.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

Art, Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

G'day Keith
don't know where you get the idea that Art's whining
from, but from the way i read his last post he write's like someone
who knows exactly what he has got, and what it will do and is
confident that when the time comes he can prove it,and to answer your
question "that" is what my money is on.
To put it plainly far from whining i get the impression he
was telling you to "go take a jump",
Jaro.

On 20 Mar 2004 20:39:18 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:

and is confident that when the time comes he can prove it

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?

You obviously don't know when that "time" will be either.

I hear one of the biggest off track betting houses in Britain has
closed its books on taking bets about "is there life on Mars?" The
interviewer asked them about bets laid in the late 60's at a 1000:1
that may offer a return soon - if the bettor hadn't passed on in the
mean "time" that is. Take a lesson from this and if you have your
money riding on Art, be sure to save the betting slip where your
inheritors don't mistake it for a worn shopping list tucked into the
bottom of the pocket in your cardigan.

I would quote something about Time's Wingéd Chariot drawing near, but
that would ruffle the feathers of those who hate English Culture. Art
likens it to fractured English (?) - such ambivalence.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?


G'day Richard

Why am i not surprised you jumped in. As i have
stated before i know very little about Antenna's, but i do consider
myself a reasonable judge of people.
I first came across this group about two years ago and what caught
my attention then was a post you made where you were attempting to
ridicule where Art had sugested putting a feed on an Antenna (i
believe it was a Moxon)and in a later post Ian White confirmed it was
the correct position.
Since then i have seen you and one or two others miss no
opportunity to attack and denigrate his posts and him personaly.
Over the same period i have seen Art gaining more and more
confidence with every post he made culminating in his last post to
this thread combined with his posts to the Q thread where he was
saying in my opinion, He knows what he has got and he knows what it
can do and what is more he can prove it,so he does not need to take
any more crap from you.
You ask for facts and figures,why should he supply them when
judging from your previous posts you have already decided whatever he
claims he is wrong.

The temperature here is 40c and is forecast to stay the same for
another three days,is it possible all this hot air is eminating from
your direction across the Pacific.

Jaro.

On 21 Mar 2004 06:13:13 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?


G'day Richard

Why am i not surprised you jumped in.
Nor I you. Thanx for that moment of irony. :-)
As i have stated before i know very little about Antenna's, but i do consider
myself a reasonable judge of people.

Hi Jaro,

That is a presumption not supported by any evidence much less
observable in your correspondence. You respond as a social critic
often, and to take me to task for that same office exposes your having
little talent for it.

As a social critic, you should examine the quality of your education
closer. For instance, English is one of the few, if not only,
languages that distinguishes and capitalizes the first person pronoun
- I. To a social examiner, the persistent usage of the lower case i
would suggest problems of either self perception, or over exposure to
the works of e.e. cummings. However, I am descending into technical
issues and diverging from your agenda of entertainment:

I first came across this group about two years ago and what caught
my attention then was a post you made where you were attempting to
ridicule where Art had sugested putting a feed on an Antenna (i
believe it was a Moxon)and in a later post Ian White confirmed it was
the correct position.

I've noted in that same span of time that, yes, you know very little
about antennas and have contributed nothing technical. We often
encounter correspondents slumming through our group in seek of
entertainment and pressing on for more discussion of personalities to
the abandonment of the theoretical (this post of yours is eminent in
that regard). Your support of Art certainly serves to relieve your
boredom - one of those decadent Old World problems of ennui?

You ask for facts and figures,why should he supply them when
judging from your previous posts you have already decided whatever he
claims he is wrong.

Why indeed, when it interferes with this decided preference for the
buffoonery of a soap opera. Facts and figures too quickly snuff the
ambiguity of martyrdom.

Jaro, please don't let this dissuade you from more entries here, their
quality heightens the contrast to real participation. This returns me
to the original observation you have not responded to:
I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?
Let's just say your prejudice has the same weight as Art's proofs you
fail to comprehend - could we say Ætherial?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote in message




Hi Jaro,

That is a presumption not supported by any evidence much less
observable in your correspondence. You respond as a social critic
often, and to take me to task for that same office exposes your having
little talent for it.

I must admit it does not come naturaly, I do tend to struggle a bit.

As a social critic, you should examine the quality of your education
closer. For instance, English is one of the few, if not only,
languages that distinguishes and capitalizes the first person pronoun
- I.
Fair dinkum!

To a social examiner, the persistent usage of the lower case i
would suggest problems of either self perception, or over exposure to
the works of e.e. cummings.

None of the above, just put it down to a basic education and a lack
of observation when reading other posts, but I thank you for "your"
observation and I assure you I will get it right in future. Have
checked out e.e. cummings but I'm not one for poetry thanks.


Your support of Art certainly serves to relieve your
boredom - one of those decadent Old World problems of ennui?

You are right again, boredom is a killer,


Jaro, please don't let this dissuade you from more entries here, their
quality heightens the contrast to real participation.

Thank you for your invitation, I am happy to continue to post but
as I pointed out it does not come naturaly, so I will have to ration
them out. Is that ok with you?.

Let's just say your prejudice has the same weight as Art's proofs
you
fail to comprehend - could we say Ætherial

Oh dear! thats the second time I have had to check my dictionary in
this post. My interpretation of that is a bit "Airy Fairy"

G'Day Richard
I limit myself to learning one new word a day, so if
you decide to reply please don't over do it, thanks.

Jaro.

(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message om...
Richard Clark wrote

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?


G'day Richard

Why am i not surprised you jumped in. As i have
stated before i know very little about Antenna's, but i do consider
myself a reasonable judge of people.

This cracks me up....You say you don't know much about antennas, but
you feel fairly sure Art is right as far as his antenna is concerned,
because you are good judge of people. Thats truly priceless... :/ MK

(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message . com...
(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

Art, Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

G'day Keith
don't know where you get the idea that Art's whining
from,

Have they kept you stored in a closet? He whines about the NG, and
it's participants. He whines about his supposed lack of edjucashun. He
whines about his medical problems. He whines about antenna modeling
programs that he doesn't even own or use. He whines because no one
seems to take his antenna too seriously. He just whines....

but from the way i read his last post he write's like someone
who knows exactly what he has got, and what it will do and is
confident that when the time comes he can prove it,and to answer your
question "that" is what my money is on.

I wouldn't hold your breath. You, "or he" will die before he decides
what he has. He grabs at different straws about once every two months
trying to "explain" what he has. It's this constant straw grabbing
that attracts the attention of many.

Oh sure, he "knows" what he has, but whether what he has conforms with
reality and the laws of modern science is another thing entirely. I've
been watching him talk about the antenna for 2-3-4 years, and I still
see no indication he has ever actually built one for current use,
besides his little 160m thing, which seems somewhat unrelated to what
I modeled. He says he used to run one at some point in time....But
even making something and using it, does not automatically mean his
description of it's operation is factual. What FIRST got me to model
his "loopole" was his claim that you would see collinear gains with
this device.
That was the first thing I had to shoot down...Landed with a might
thud it did...His comments of that type ended quickly. But he won't
believe my claims that his loop/cap device is nothing but a simple
matching device. "others descriptions of linear resonator devices
non-withstanding" I'm not totally sold on that theory as far as
getting a match in itself. His views of "coupling" are very distorted
in my opinion. That why I asked him a few days ago to describe
coupling. He declined to answer...

To put it plainly far from whining i get the impression he
was telling you to "go take a jump",
Jaro.

He wants to tell nearly everyone on here to take a jump. Doesn't
bother me...MK