On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Yep, in your delusions of granduer.


--
Jim Pennino

On 1/30/2014 1:44 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Yep, in your delusions of granduer.



ROFLMAO!

Sorry about your delusions of competence.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 1:44 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Yep, in your delusions of granduer.



ROFLMAO!

Sorry about your delusions of competence.

One wonders just how long I can keep toying with this idiot and his
obsessive need to get in the last word.




--
Jim Pennino

On 1/30/2014 2:40 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 1:44 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Yep, in your delusions of granduer.



ROFLMAO!

Sorry about your delusions of competence.

One wonders just how long I can keep toying with this idiot and his
obsessive need to get in the last word.


Me get the last word? You're the one who jumped in with your trolling
comments. Let's see you shut up.

But I know trolls never can do that.



--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 2:40 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 1:44 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/30/2014 12:57 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/29/2014 5:36 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Nope, you are a delusional know it all with an inflated sense of self
importance that doesn't know what the word "troll" means and a tool box
consisting only of ad hominem attacks.



No., I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Sure you do, in your delusions of granduer.


I'm glad you agree that I correct trolls when they are wrong.


Yep, in your delusions of granduer.



ROFLMAO!

Sorry about your delusions of competence.

One wonders just how long I can keep toying with this idiot and his
obsessive need to get in the last word.


Me get the last word? You're the one who jumped in with your trolling
comments. Let's see you shut up.

But I know trolls never can do that.

You have no clue what the word "troll" means though if you were to look
in a mirror you would have a clue.

BTW, one does not need to know the math to derive SWR from complex impedance
values to be able to understand what SWR is and means.

Nor does one need to know the math required to design a Smith chart to
be able to plot impedance values on one and read SWR from one.




--
Jim Pennino

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...

snip

I did invent a unit of measure which seems to have stuck for a time at
a former college. During college, I built a device to quantify female
desirability. It was an IR detector that basically measured the mount
of exposed skin. I needed a unit of measure for female desirability
which became the milli-Helen. Since Helen of Troy launched 1000
ships, 1 milli-Helen would launch 1 ship. The negative was also true
as negative 1 milli-Helen would sink 1 ship. Unfortunately, it
somewhat backfired and failed to provide me with any additional dates
and lady friends.

That's interesting, since a coworker and I did something like it in the
1990s. (No animal testing was performed.)

You rated women's looks based on the Optimum Viewing Distance in feet. At
200 feet, say, you can tell it's a woman but not much more. At 50 feet, you
can gauge whether you want a closer look, so lower numbers indicate a
more-attractive woman. If she still looks good at 15 feet, but you can see
her crooked teeth and nose hair at 10 feet, then the rating is set to 15,
the "best" viewing distance for her.

If she's really attractive, you probably would want to make physical
contact, so she becomes a 0, in effect a completely attractive woman. In
this system, the rating number could actually go slightly negative but that
would be splitting hairs.

"Sal"