In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
You are making the same error as the village idiot.
All EM radiation is the same in its nature. Terms like light and radio
waves are simply labels we have applied to different parts of the EM
spectrum. In part possibly because we didn't realise they were related, I
can't recall the history.
The village idiot's confusion is added to by him trying to mix simple Bohr
models of the atom with more complex ones.
Basically, he is out of his depth, as usual. He is forever trying to mix
'school book' physics with terms he has picked up but doesn't understand.
When people try to help him, he abuses them, sometimes inventing his own
'whacky' theories when he can't understand how this work.

Wayne left off my second question, which is well illustrated by what is
quoted above ...

2. Are jimp and brian reay one and the same, because both monikers display
the same
incapability of engaging in well-socialised civil conversations, resorting
to infantile abuse,
and both refuse to be drawn whenever challenged on a technical matter?

Are you attempting to say that both disdain incoherent, word salad babble?



--
Jim Pennino

wrote in message ...

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
You are making the same error as the village idiot.
All EM radiation is the same in its nature. Terms like light and radio
waves are simply labels we have applied to different parts of the EM
spectrum. In part possibly because we didn't realise they were related, I
can't recall the history.
The village idiot's confusion is added to by him trying to mix simple
Bohr
models of the atom with more complex ones.
Basically, he is out of his depth, as usual. He is forever trying to mix
'school book' physics with terms he has picked up but doesn't understand.
When people try to help him, he abuses them, sometimes inventing his own
'whacky' theories when he can't understand how this work.

Wayne left off my second question, which is well illustrated by what is
quoted above ...

2. Are jimp and brian reay one and the same, because both monikers display
the same
incapability of engaging in well-socialised civil conversations, resorting
to infantile abuse,
and both refuse to be drawn whenever challenged on a technical matter?

# Are you attempting to say that both disdain incoherent, word salad babble?

I took that to mean that Gareth doesn't believe that two DIFFERENT people
would disagree with him.



--
Jim Pennino

On 09/09/2015 22:40, Wayne wrote:


wrote in message ...

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
You are making the same error as the village idiot.
All EM radiation is the same in its nature. Terms like light and radio
waves are simply labels we have applied to different parts of the EM
spectrum. In part possibly because we didn't realise they were
related, I
can't recall the history.
The village idiot's confusion is added to by him trying to mix simple
Bohr
models of the atom with more complex ones.
Basically, he is out of his depth, as usual. He is forever trying to mix
'school book' physics with terms he has picked up but doesn't
understand.
When people try to help him, he abuses them, sometimes inventing his own
'whacky' theories when he can't understand how this work.

Wayne left off my second question, which is well illustrated by what is
quoted above ...

2. Are jimp and brian reay one and the same, because both monikers
display
the same
incapability of engaging in well-socialised civil conversations,
resorting
to infantile abuse,
and both refuse to be drawn whenever challenged on a technical matter?

# Are you attempting to say that both disdain incoherent, word salad
babble?

I took that to mean that Gareth doesn't believe that two DIFFERENT
people would disagree with him.




In essence, yes.

He and his chums (the 'usual rejects') frequently claim, if a few people
disagree with them, that they are simply sock puppets- even when there
is no evidence to support this.


Perhaps you will understand why we tend to ignore him, thus far you've
not seen his more disgraceful behaviour.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
He and his chums (the 'usual rejects') frequently claim, if a few people
disagree with them, that they are simply sock puppets- even when there is
no evidence to support this.

Untrue, and a further example of the make-believe world of your foetid
imagination
for which there is no supporting evidence.

Perhaps you will understand why we tend to ignore him, thus far you've not
seen his more disgraceful behaviour.

Do you mean the use of the Internet to assert the right of reply to grossly
offensive
posts on the Internet, such as your statement that my wife was a sheep iin
the bed
next to me, one of 24 such perverted comments made by you when you were
under
training to be a schoolteacher at an all-girls' grammar school at the age of
45 after
you had been sacked from your job in industry?

Such obsessive perversions from you meant that you are totally unsuitable to
be
in any sort of job involving young people.

"Wayne" wrote in message
...
I took that to mean that Gareth doesn't believe that two DIFFERENT people
would disagree with him.

Not at all, many disagree and do so in a polite and debating format, for
that is what an international
forum should be like, but jimp and reay, from their recent gratuitous abuse
of the past couple of hours
both present themselves as escapees from the kindergarten.

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
"Wayne" wrote in message
...
I took that to mean that Gareth doesn't believe that two DIFFERENT people
would disagree with him.

Not at all, many disagree and do so in a polite and debating format, for
that is what an international
forum should be like, but jimp and reay, from their recent gratuitous abuse
of the past couple of hours
both present themselves as escapees from the kindergarten.

My saying your questions showed an utter lack of understanding of
wave-particle duality was as polite as it could possibly be phrased.

If you want gratuitous abuse, your questions are utter, babbling
nonsense based on total ignorance and are a steaming pile of word
salad idiocy.


--
Jim Pennino

wrote:

If you want gratuitous abuse, your questions are utter, babbling
nonsense based on total ignorance and are a steaming pile of word
salad idiocy.


Even that's much, much more polite and restrained than Gareth deserves. He
should think himself lucky here!

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur