I can hardly believe what I read below. All I can do is just shake my
head in disbelief. Here you are an EE and you support a report that you
have never read, studied, or tested. This is a good example of Chet's
definition of stupid. This is what gives science a bad reputation.
I appreciate the work you have researched and published, but man at
least read the report before supporting it.
Doug
I stand by my post. Anyone who doesn't like what I write is
welcome to delete it. I am one of those who has done a lot of work
(years worth), and shared it. I've also published my test setup in
detail, so that anyone who wished to confirm it can do so. I know
what real research is. I haven't seen the work that Steve and his
collaborators have done, but I suspect it's pretty good, and I
suspect that it is documented. I don't use beam antennas, so the
topic is not of direct interest to me. But if it was, and if
someone else did serious measurements and published them, I'd buy
and study them all.
I don't owe anyone an apology. Cheap is cheap. Head in sand is
head in sand. I don't support "bashing" of one product over
another without technical backup, nor do I support mindless
defense of a product solely on the basis that a person made the
decision to buy it.
I finished my EE in 1964. I've been studying something nearly
every day since. Some of it in EE, some of it in very different
fields. When you stop, it's time for someone to throw dirt on you.
FWIW -- in the past four hours, I've received a half dozen emails
appreciating my comments from others who I know to be actively
doing real research.
73,
Jim Brown K9YC
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date:
08/07/2007 6:32 PM
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|