"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,

But I think you are off the deep end because of your denial of
ratings, inability to see that if there is no listening of conseuence
beyond a certain signal intensity, there must be a truth there, and
your idea that knowing wave and propagation theory is somehow
necessary to understanding that listeners don't tune to weak signals.

Well you don't seem to know what reception is like around here on the
west coast and all you need is a portable radio to find out. Knowledge
of propagation is not necessary. You just keep on making crap up about
how hard or easy it is to pick up a station based on something you read
and misinterpreted on the Internet.

It does not matter what "reception is like here" because we can easily see
what kind of reception generates listening... and, as said before, unless
the signal is very strong, there is no listening generated. And beyond that,
we have the fact that AM generates very little listening under age 45, and
soon it will be "under age 55" and there will be no revenue to support the
band.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,

But I think you are off the deep end because of your denial of
ratings, inability to see that if there is no listening of conseuence
beyond a certain signal intensity, there must be a truth there, and
your idea that knowing wave and propagation theory is somehow
necessary to understanding that listeners don't tune to weak signals.

Well you don't seem to know what reception is like around here on the
west coast and all you need is a portable radio to find out. Knowledge
of propagation is not necessary. You just keep on making crap up about
how hard or easy it is to pick up a station based on something you read
and misinterpreted on the Internet.

It does not matter what "reception is like here" because we can easily see
what kind of reception generates listening... and, as said before, unless
the signal is very strong, there is no listening generated. And beyond that,
we have the fact that AM generates very little listening under age 45, and
soon it will be "under age 55" and there will be no revenue to support the
band.

So the reality is you don't know but are guessing based on manufactured
statistics or stuff you read on the Internet. However, although you do
not have direct knowledge you feel free to tell me what I can receive
well or not. What a crock.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,

But I think you are off the deep end because of your denial of
ratings, inability to see that if there is no listening of conseuence
beyond a certain signal intensity, there must be a truth there, and
your idea that knowing wave and propagation theory is somehow
necessary to understanding that listeners don't tune to weak signals.

Well you don't seem to know what reception is like around here on the
west coast and all you need is a portable radio to find out. Knowledge
of propagation is not necessary. You just keep on making crap up about
how hard or easy it is to pick up a station based on something you read
and misinterpreted on the Internet.

It does not matter what "reception is like here" because we can easily see
what kind of reception generates listening... and, as said before, unless
the signal is very strong, there is no listening generated. And beyond that,
we have the fact that AM generates very little listening under age 45, and
soon it will be "under age 55" and there will be no revenue to support the
band.

So the reality is you don't know but are guessing based on manufactured
statistics or stuff you read on the Internet. However, although you do
not have direct knowledge you feel free to tell me what I can receive
well or not. What a crock.

Yes, 'Eduardo' is a crock. A full crock. He's also a fake Hispanic, AND a
pathological liar. He's been the latter for at least 50 years now.

I think his mommie taught him that one. After all, she went to the same school as
Hillary Clinton, so what can one expect?

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

So the reality is you don't know but are guessing based on manufactured
statistics or stuff you read on the Internet. However, although you do
not have direct knowledge you feel free to tell me what I can receive
well or not. What a crock.

1. Arbitron data is not manufactured, and if you combine a year of surveys,
and read the data in MapMaker, you can easily do a "fuzzy line" plot of
where a station has useful coverage. It's funny that it tends to match the
10 mvm contour nicely.

2. I do not get any data on the internet. Before we could process the data
in Maximiser, we had to plot every diary against a map of ZIPs at
Arbitrons's HQ in Maryland. Ask the Arbitron folks who was there most often
to do that?

3. I have no interest in what you receive. I have an interest in what people
can listen to, so I made sure I knew what a listenable signal was, first.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

So the reality is you don't know but are guessing based on manufactured
statistics or stuff you read on the Internet. However, although you do
not have direct knowledge you feel free to tell me what I can receive
well or not. What a crock.

1. Arbitron data is not manufactured, and if you combine a year of surveys,
and read the data in MapMaker, you can easily do a "fuzzy line" plot of
where a station has useful coverage. It's funny that it tends to match the
10 mvm contour nicely.

2. I do not get any data on the internet. Before we could process the data
in Maximiser, we had to plot every diary against a map of ZIPs at
Arbitrons's HQ in Maryland. Ask the Arbitron folks who was there most often
to do that?

3. I have no interest in what you receive. I have an interest in what people
can listen to, so I made sure I knew what a listenable signal was, first.

More importantly you have no interest in reality.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

So the reality is you don't know but are guessing based on manufactured
statistics or stuff you read on the Internet. However, although you do
not have direct knowledge you feel free to tell me what I can receive
well or not. What a crock.

1. Arbitron data is not manufactured, and if you combine a year of
surveys,
and read the data in MapMaker, you can easily do a "fuzzy line" plot of
where a station has useful coverage. It's funny that it tends to match
the
10 mvm contour nicely.

2. I do not get any data on the internet. Before we could process the
data
in Maximiser, we had to plot every diary against a map of ZIPs at
Arbitrons's HQ in Maryland. Ask the Arbitron folks who was there most
often
to do that?

3. I have no interest in what you receive. I have an interest in what
people
can listen to, so I made sure I knew what a listenable signal was, first.

More importantly you have no interest in reality.

reality is what the broad based public does. What you individually do is
irrelevant.