Roy Lewallen wrote:
Frank's wrote:

I think the EH is the same idea as the CFA; in which case the following
paper
says it all: http://www.fi.uba.ar/materias/6654/d...CFAantenna.pdf.

It is hard to imagine going to these lengths to debunk nonsense, but I guess
it is the only way.

And, as we periodically see here, even going to these lengths aren't
completely adequate.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

That's because the EH antenna and the CFA antenna are based on a
religion or faith, not on science.

No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

73 Tom

wrote:
No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)


Aww Cecil, does every thread have to turn into that? 8^)

-73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Cecil Moore wrote:

wrote:

No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.


:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)

Cecil

Please drop it. Not every subject is an attack on you, and the rest
should not be used as an opportunity for your propoganda.

It is very tiring.

tom
K0TAR