|
Has "antenna" died?
|
Has "antenna" died?
J. Mc Laughlin wrote:
Dear Group: While I attend only now-and-then, it seems as it has been days since new communications have been posted. Something might have changed with my ISP or I asserted some secret instruction. 73, Mac N8TT You're fine. Sometimes it's just quiet. Art is in an institution or fresh back with good meds. Others are probably busy with it being summer. Those of us in the upper midwest haven't had a "normal" summer yet this year which is just fine by me. Bring on the drought, bring on more cold summers! tom K0TAR |
Has "antenna" died?
Art is in an institution or fresh back with good meds. Others are probably busy with it being summer. Those of us in the upper midwest haven't had a "normal" summer yet this year which is just fine by me. Bring on the drought, bring on more cold summers! Tom, this wierd summer ( or lack of it ) has applied to the Pacific Northwest, too.... except for the past week. Ed K7AAT |
Has "antenna" died?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:51:24 -0400, "J. Mc Laughlin"
wrote: Dear Group: While I attend only now-and-then, it seems as it has been days since new communications have been posted. Hi Mac, 'tis the nature of things. Participation has been falling from the peak of 1999-2001, down by about 6dB on average, but 10dB for July (if posting volume were power, mostly dissipated heat; double that if you think of postings as lost potential). The posting count follows the classic battleship curve of emerging then declining fads, fashion, schools of thought, what-have-you social trends. We are now as engaged as we were in 1995. Consult: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...na/about?hl=en I would not speculate or offer that counts indicate quality, however. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Has "antenna" died?
"Ed" wrote in message . 192.196... Art is in an institution or fresh back with good meds. Others are probably busy with it being summer. Those of us in the upper midwest haven't had a "normal" summer yet this year which is just fine by me. Bring on the drought, bring on more cold summers! Tom, this wierd summer ( or lack of it ) has applied to the Pacific Northwest, too.... except for the past week. Ed K7AAT but at least all the 'normal' kooks are taking a vacation or got their meds caught up. sure reduces the noise level in here quite a bit. |
Has "antenna" died?
tom wrote:
... bring on more cold summers! Caused, no doubt, by Global Warming. :-) -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:11:32 -0400, "J. Mc Laughlin"
wrote: Dear Richard and Group: Ah so! Since I have taken to automating the purging of notes from authors-of-noise, it occurred to me that I might have turned up the squelch too high. I am relieved to know that is probably not the case. In the matter of antennas: my esteemed colleague AB8T's EM class' antenna project was a great success. Students designed UHF TV antennas (Channels 14-51) using EZNEC5+, constructed the antennas, and then had their performance compared to expected. It was an opportunity for students to learn-by-doing in several areas. As readers on this group know well, antennas involve several areas of science and engineering. The one important area not covered because it was thought too far from EM, was the issue of survivability in the presence of wind/ice loads. Hi Mac, It sounds like you will survive this fading battleship curve by having secured your own life boat with these class projects - congratulations to AB8T. Myself, I find more interesting "antenna" applications being designed at the nanoscale in a remarkable field called Surface Plasmon Resonance. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Has "antenna" died?
"Richard Clark" ha scritto nel messaggio ... Myself, I find more interesting "antenna" applications being designed at the nanoscale in a remarkable field called Surface Plasmon Resonance. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Myself, still keep alive the interest on antenna and this group simply with a rock-stable state of mind that concern in don't ever buy a commercial antenna. My 2 cents, -.-. --.- |
Has "antenna" died?
"Richard Clark" ha scritto nel messaggio ... Myself, I find more interesting "antenna" applications being designed at the nanoscale in a remarkable field called Surface Plasmon Resonance. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Myself, still keep alive the interest on antenna and this group simply with a rock-stable state of mind that concern in don't ever buy a commercial antenna. My 2 cents, -.-. --.- |
Has "antenna" died?
Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote: ... bring on more cold summers! Caused, no doubt, by Global Warming. :-) Of course, but it's "Climate Change", that way no matter what happens it the fault of humanity. On a similar note, has anyone noticed how the sun's output has a lot to do with the climate? And that it sort of tracks what's going on? Ok, tracks quite well. tom K0TAR |
Has "antenna" died?
tom wrote:
On a similar note, has anyone noticed how the sun's output has a lot to do with the climate? And that it sort of tracks what's going on? Ok, tracks quite well. Something else that tracks quite well is the size of the ice caps at the North Poles of both Earth and Mars proving, beyond a doubt, that there must be intelligent life on Mars generating emissions that effect Climate Change, just like here. :-) -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Something else that tracks quite well is the size of the ice caps at the North Poles of both Earth and Mars proving, beyond a doubt, that there must be intelligent life on Mars generating emissions that effect Climate Change, just like here. :-) So what we have proof of here is that alien life exists and is much further advanced than we are! I think The President should spend billions of dollars on this! Actually billions is nothing in this blow money on crap budget, we should spend a trillion on it. THIS IS IMPORTANT!!!! And there is no one with more smarts than The President (TM). tom K0TAR |
Has "antenna" died?
On Jul 31, 8:51*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote: ... bring on more cold summers! Caused, no doubt, by Global Warming. :-) -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil, your observation regarding the breakage of the ice caps tells us that we are moving back to a particular climate that in the past was normal! We can learn about that and past environments by examining the different layers of ice. The last ice cap to shear revealed a reed coracle occupied by people in animal fur holding stone tools. None of these had green cards which emphasizes what goes around comes around with additions supplied by man |
Has "antenna" died?
Art Unwin wrote:
On Jul 31, 8:51 am, Cecil Moore wrote: tom wrote: ... bring on more cold summers! Caused, no doubt, by Global Warming. :-) -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil, your observation regarding the breakage of the ice caps tells us that we are moving back to a particular climate that in the past was normal! There is no such thing as a normal climate. It changes over time, and short term is very variable. We can learn about that and past environments by examining the different layers of ice. The last ice cap to shear revealed a reed coracle occupied by people in animal fur holding stone tools. None of these had green cards which emphasizes what goes around comes around with additions supplied by man Man has no effect upon the weather? Fine, show me the mechanism by which the retention of heat in the atmosphere is not affect by the percentage of greenhouse gases and water vapor. We would not exist without the effect, so discarding the effect is impossible. So now, WHY is the increased percentage being negated. To show a heat retention effect is not difficult, middle school students do it all the time. But what we get is political statements. A political statement declaring that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist is just as valid as noting that since the present administration has been in office, there haven't been any hurricanes. So therefore, there are less hurricanes when Democrats are in office. Of course that's a stupid statement. But both statements are. non-sequitar maximus. BTW, mining the available data to produce one anomalous result is just as bogus. The creationists and lunar landing hoaxers have been doing that for years. You have to produce the theory first, then find supporting or refuting facts. The deniers don't produce an alternate theory - they only try to disprove. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Has "antenna" died?
Art Unwin wrote:
We can learn about that and past environments by examining the different layers of ice. You're right, Art. The last Global Warming cycle peaked about 8000 years ago and ever since, the average temperature has been drifting down toward the next ice age. That is obvious to anyone who can read a graph. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...core-petit.png Global Warming is the second biggest hoax ever perpetuated upon mankind. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
Michael Coslo wrote:
Man has no effect upon the weather? Fine, show me the mechanism by which the retention of heat in the atmosphere is not affect by the percentage of greenhouse gases and water vapor. We would not exist without the effect, so discarding the effect is impossible. Therefore, get rid of all the water and CO2? It appears from the following graph that C02 density is a lagging indicator introducing the next ice age. 25000 years from now, those greenhouse gases will come in really handy. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...core-petit.png -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Michael Coslo wrote: Man has no effect upon the weather? Fine, show me the mechanism by which the retention of heat in the atmosphere is not affect by the percentage of greenhouse gases and water vapor. We would not exist without the effect, so discarding the effect is impossible. Therefore, get rid of all the water and CO2? It appears from the following graph that C02 density is a lagging indicator introducing the next ice age. 25000 years from now, those greenhouse gases will come in really handy. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...core-petit.png -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com - Besides that.....earth has bigger catastrophic threats than CO2. |
Has "antenna" died?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: Man has no effect upon the weather? Fine, show me the mechanism by which the retention of heat in the atmosphere is not affect by the percentage of greenhouse gases and water vapor. We would not exist without the effect, so discarding the effect is impossible. Therefore, get rid of all the water and CO2? Hmmm, did you get that I was inferring that from saying we would not exist without the Greenhouse effect? I'm not trying to eliminate everyone. It appears from the following graph that C02 density is a lagging indicator introducing the next ice age. 25000 years from now, those greenhouse gases will come in really handy. Aren't you arguing both sides of the issue now, Cecil? If Greenhouse induced warming is bogus, then those gases won't come in handy, will they? Given that climate change is going to happen regardless of human input, I'd make a guess that at the turning point of a heating cycle, the oceanic currents will shift, due to loss of ice blockage at the poles. Then, the change is agumented/mitigated by solar output. Also augumenting/repressing is effects such as atmospheric dust and sulfur dioxide content, and yes, the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. All this gives rise to varying average temperatures, and depending on the timing, can make a greater or lesser cooling or heating effect. Now given that there is a lot of natural variability, does it follow that humans should pay no mind to their own additions to the load? I believe that we need to find out the effect, and the extent of the effect. Taking the idea of the greenhouse gases coming in handy, I can envision being at one of those sharp drops in Temperature, and using gases to moderate the temperature. There is a lot of Methane in the form of clathrate hydrates, that might just spell the survival of humanity. Or maybe not. Maybe we should know what it will do. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...core-petit.png Looks to me like a pretty fair correlation, Cecil. Now what I am interested in is the event that occurred at those peaks, and also the valleys. It's fairly sharp. I don't doubt that as things rapidly cooled, that there was a reduction in CO2 in the atmosphere. What was the cause? It's a great graph for speculation. Interestingly regular. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Has "antenna" died?
Michael Coslo wrote:
What was the cause? Certainly not homo sapiens. I strongly suspect the primary source of energy in our solar system is the cause. Now what could that be? -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: What was the cause? Certainly not homo sapiens. I strongly suspect the primary source of energy in our solar system is the cause. Now what could that be? Some would say God....... ;^) - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Has "antenna" died?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: What was the cause? Certainly not homo sapiens. Okay, then what is the mitigating mechanism for mankind to not have an effect? We are increasing the percentage of greenhous gases. Why does it not have an effect? I strongly suspect the primary source of energy in our solar system is the cause. Now what could that be? It would take an absolute idiot to not think that the sun was the major influence on the temperature of the earth. But I don't think that it follows that man has no effect on the system. A prime example is the planet Mercury. It catches quite a bit more solar radiation than we do on earth. But the parts not catching the solar radiation aren't warm at all. And Venus, which catches more than we do, has temperatures that are much higher than would otherwise be expected, and these temps are not in areas directly exposed by the sun. Now what could that be? That was a little condescending wasn't it? - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Has "antenna" died?
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:27:48 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote: Some would say God....... ;^) They might also say it was retribution for those satan worshiping Neanderthals except for the fact the world has been around only as long as the first quarter inch of the graph. Maybe the 394 thousand years before creation was an annealing process. The latest news of McCain voting down the Clunker's Bill (What? not going to give us back our own money? Still some bankers without their last year bonus?) suggests the latest spike is to anneal out the remaining Neanderthal DNA. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Has "antenna" died?
Michael Coslo wrote:
Okay, then what is the mitigating mechanism for mankind to not have an effect? We are increasing the percentage of greenhous gases. Why does it not have an effect? The Global-Warming/Ice-Age cycle has been primary and we are 8000 years into the next ice age. If man has any effect at all, it will be to delay the onslaught of the next ice age. Indeed, this ice age cycle seems to be somewhat delayed compared to the previous ones. Seems that you are asking for proof that man doesn't have any effect. That's a lot like asking for proof that God doesn't exist. The onus of proof is upon those who assert the positive. Nobody has proven that man is or can be the anywhere near the primary cause of global warming. The ice-core temperatures prove that the most severe global warming(s) occurred before man ever existed. But I don't think that it follows that man has no effect on the system. I think you would agree that plants have much more of an effect than man? Plants love CO2 and produce O2. There was a time in the past when the oxygen level was double what it is today and dragonflies had a wingspan equal to my armspan. Believing that man has a drastic effect on the present global temperatures is akin to believing that the earth is the center of the universe, i.e. delusions of grandeur, e.g. Al Gore. Now what could that be? That was a little condescending wasn't it? It's called a rhetorical question. :-) I ask a lot of rhetorical questions. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Has "antenna" died?
On Jul 30, 11:35*pm, tom wrote:
J. Mc Laughlin wrote: Dear Group: * While I attend only now-and-then, it seems as it has been days since new communications have been posted. Something might have changed with my ISP or I asserted some secret instruction. 73, * Mac * N8TT You're fine. *Sometimes it's just quiet. Art is in an institution or fresh back with good meds. *Others are probably busy with it being summer. *Those of us in the upper midwest haven't had a "normal" summer yet this year which is just fine by me. Bring on the drought, bring on more cold summers! tom K0TAR Hes back things should pick up. |
Has "antenna" died?
well your still here 2 years on....
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com