RadioBanter - BTW Stevie were watch the news lately about NASA

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

None of us "rail against" persons with commercial or military
experience BECAUSE of that experience, Brian...

Not true.

Is true. Who else in this forum with "commercial or military"
communications experience rants on-and-on like Lennie?

We DO "rail against"
people who have NO experience in AMATEUR RADIO who then come to an
Amateur Radio forum and presume to tell us how we should be "doing"
things.

He doesn't "presume." He does so.

He doesn't "tell" me anything!

There you go personalizing everything. You're just itching for a
fight, aren't you?.

With you or Lennie? Sheesh. Not much of a challenge there.

You appear to be challenged trying to make up your mind.

Your buddy on the liberal coast is the ONLY one here who routinely
"rails against" anyone based upon RADIO (ie technical and theoretical)
experience.

Not true.

Is true. Unless we include you.

Citation, please.

Wade through about a ton of LennieRant's from the last seven
years, Brain. They are prolific.

At least Len's posting tend to follow the thread. It's even more
difficult wading through your rants because of your predeliction to
generate new threads.

Period.

Longhand punctuation?

His attacks on me based upon having been an Armed
Forces Avionics Tech and Jim, N2EY, for his various projects are
point-in-case.

And you presume to tell Len how he should be doing things.

Nope. I have not once suggested how he conduct his "professional"
career.

Hi, hi! You deny that he has had a "professional" career.

No, I've not.

I've stated that I doubt that his career is all that his stories
make him out to be.

What do his stories make him out to be? What do your stories make you
out to be?

Kinda like your "There I was in Somalia..." stuff.

Yep. There I was and didn't see you. Didn't see you in Korea, either.
Nor the Philippine Islands, nor Saudi Arabia.

Where were you again?

You won't find a single posting by me in any "professional
radio" forum", Brian.

You are so unprofessional that you wouldn't know where to find one.

Uh huh...WHO is "personalizing" this, Brain?

Merely an impression that I picked up from your postings.

Yet Lennie, without one day's bit of experience in practical
Amateur Radio, persumes to know what's good for us.

Funny. That's just what the FCC does.

Nope.

Comparing Lennie to the FCC is like comparing a mob hitman to a
Sheriff's Deputy.

I'm sure that you local Sheriff will be happy to hear you say so.

No one doubts that Lennie knows how a radio works or that he was
an adequate bench technician.

Not true. How many lies will you rack up in this single post?

Is true. I've said it before, and I said it right there.

What you say from one day to the next is inconsistant and suspect.

Nope.

But it obviously makes you warm and fuzzy to promulgate such lies.

Of course lying is easy for you.

Len knows more about amateur radio than Chairman Powell did. Len knows
more about radio than your ham-engineer colleagues that you mentioned
below.

However he has, to this date, zero-point-zero hours of experience
as a licensed Radio Amateur.

Nor does the Chairman of the FCC.

The Chairman of the FCC is not in this forum, now is he?

Nor is Mr. Haney. And I do mind where some "experienced" amateurs are
trying to point the ARS.

Mr Haney DOES have tons of experience in Amateur Radio.

Weak diversion, Brain. Try again?

Diversion? Your position is that Len should have no say WRT amateur
radio because he is a non-amateur. I point out that there are some
real-live amateur that I disagree with. Why must you take exception to
everthing that I might say?

He is not now nor ever has been a radio
OPERATOR as it pertains to Amateur Radio practice. He has
zero-point-zero hours of experience in emergency communications. His
list ot "zeros" is lengthy, yet he pretends to be an authority on
Amateur Radio policies and/or practices.

Ditto the Chaiman of the FCC and his numerous staffers. Soon, he's
going to "presume" to tell you how it is, both on policy and practice.

And they are not in this forum, are they?

However the Chairman and his staff DO have Amateurs on the FCC
payroll from whom they take counsel.

Conflict of interest.

WHAT conflict of interest?

It's no more a "conflict of interest" to have Amateurs on the FCC
payroll and providing counsel about Amatuer issues than it is to have
any OTHER service represented.

Kind of self-serving, isn't it? Like making laws that benefits one's
portfolio.

Perhaps they should relinquish "thier" licenses while in the employment
of the FCC, and retest two years after they retire or leave?

He's nothing of the sort.

Your adaptation of his diversion about how "we" allegedly "diss"
him along some ill-perceived lines of how radios work or RF propagates
is assinine.

Not true. Lie #4.

Is true. And I can see you're back in form.

Myself and others have "called" Lennie based upon NUMEROUS errors
as they pertain to Amateur Radio policy and practice.

Everyone makes mistakes. Even you as, I have pointed out so many times
before.

But I admit mine.

Rarely. Even as I point them out.

Lennie's several years behind.

You're a close second.

Merely a thorn in your side. How you hate being caught in your lies.

You and he are the ONLY ones suggesting that the theory of
electronics or radio wave propagation are issues here.

You are the one suggesting it...(SNIP)

No, I am not.

Hi!

(UNSNIP).....Len and I are the ones pointing it out.

Then we have you in yet another mistruth, Brain.

I have N E V E R suggested that there is one iota of difference
in theory, technology OR propagation.

If you insist on suggesting otherwise, you are wantonly lying.

You've continued to say that Len knows nothing of amateur radio, but
now you say that he does know theory, technology, AND propagation.
Would you mind tallying up the number of question in the Amateur Radio
Question Pools that pertain to theory, technology, AND propagation?

Lastly, the original argument was about contributions that
Amatuers made during WW2. All of the references I made were to
electronics-related fields for which AMATEURS were SPECIFCIALLY sought
and recruited due to thier already-demonstrated competency or skill in
radiocommunications.

Hmmmm? There's that damned one way valve again. Amateurs can jump in
and fill military and commercial radio roles, but commercial and
military radio Ops can have absolutely NO knowledge of amateur comms!

Hi, hi! Talk about an Iron Curtain! Your brain is on "diode."

Nope.

Where did I say that, Brian?

Then tell us how it works, again.

How "what" works, Brain?

That amateur radio operators can magically step into military and
commercial radio roles (as claimed in WWII), yet a commercial or
military radio OP knows nothing of amateur radio.

No one, myself included, ever stated that thier licensure was the
end-all or sole reason for thier employment or service.

Steve, K4YZ

Cronyism and Nepotism are as good reasons as any. You could do worse
by having someone who actually knows something about RF making comments
on the ARS.

What does knowing ANYthing about "RF" have to do with knowing
about the Amateur Radio service?

The FCC tests us on knowledge of RF for "licensure." Take it up with
them.

And, just as Lennie the Liar, blindly skip over the OTHER parts of
the exam and weakly try to slip in yet another diversion.

lame...really lame.

Poor Steve. Gets caught in a logic trap and cries foul.

I worked with many engineers in 2000. About a third of them were
Amateur licensees. The rest weren't. They were excellent in thier
fields. But they knew nothing of Amateur Radio.

Holy Cow! A third of the engineers were amateur radio operators but
knew nothing of Amateur Radio? Were they RF engineers?

Yep.

Did they mentor YOU?

Lennie's "knowledge" of "Amateur Radio" comes from having used an
Amateur Radio magazine to get his "writings" into print and from his
flailing's-about in this forum.

It's too bad that you are allowed to continue to denigrate a fine
amateur radio builders publication merely to discredit Len's articles
that were contained within it's covers.

Where, Brain, was ONE WORD of "denigration" of the MAGAZINE...?!?!

You make it appear as if the Editors of Ham Radio were duped into
running Len's unworthy writings. You did so just now by using the word
"used," and previously by incessantly using the word, "defunct."

Thorn. Side.

Best of Luck.

For what? Pulling the rug out from underneath you and Lennie?

That didn't need luck...You make it all too easy.

You are truly delusional.

There you go calling the pot black again, Oh Parroting One.

You have a black heart and a black pot.

Kinda
like your accusations of me "denigrating" a "fine amateur radio buildrs
publication.

"builders"

Substantiated accusations. You might want to fold this hand instead of
getting your nose rubbed in it some more.