wrote in message . ..
In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
In , wrote:
Many times...........even tested them.

Sorry your tests results were debunked by

Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a

voodoo tech


(Frank never tested any of the antennas.)


I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the

roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the

top was parallel with the ground (pointing

East, if that makes a difference).

Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically

polarized field strength dropped by a hair.

However, horizontally polarized field strength

made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I

listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the

lanyard.




But,,,,there is supposed to be no skip...


Who said anything about skip, Twist?


Some weak signals disappeared while others

came in that weren't there before. Let the whip
go back to vertical and the old signals came

back while the new signals were lost.

Looks like it's a compromise situation.
*



It is. You failed to account for, or at least detail, a myriad of
factors. Were you in a free zone?


No, I pay taxes just like every other homeowner.


How near was the closest object?


The curb was right next to the truck. Gee, maybe that messed up my
test.....


Did
you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests?


Yes I did. Did I use it? No.


Did
you repeat the test with the antenna on the opposite side of the
vehicle?


The antenna not mounted on either side of the vehicle. It was mounted
on the front of the vehicle, which I clearly stated and you couldn't
comprehend because of your communication deficit.


Did you move the vehicle around?


Why yes, it started break-dancing as soon as I keyed the mic.


A single day's atmospheric
condition for a single test?


Sunny, 74 degrees, 20% humidity, 29.96 in/Hg, tree and grass pollen
were moderate, weed pollen was low, mold spores were high, no
measurable seismic activity and the aurora monitor was quiet.


One perfunctory test is meaningless in the
context of science.


Unless the test is conclusive. Once again you are confusing inductive
and deductive logic, but that's no suprise since the only part of the
book you studied was the chapter on logical fallacies.




=============

http://tinyurl.com/ytcah
http://tinyurl.com/2yor7
http://tinyurl.com/2sapq
(Twisty cast the first stone)

=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."

"...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough."

"Athis is how proper communication wroks..."

---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----


frank........twistie is a big skip talker ...didn't you know that???
he talks on channel 6......he is a big strapper........

"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote
in message ...
(I Am Not George) wrote in
m:

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg



heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool.

So is this little bro.

http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/

(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote in news:8058-
:

From:
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
"Landshark" wrote in
news:7h9Ac.4268$sv7.451
@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com:
****************You mean he didn't know
that was a post made with Forte Agent? I thought George knew how to
read
headers? LMAO!!!!
******************Landshark

Thats too funny, the guy you call george didnt

make that claim. iamnotgeorge made that post
and twisty said he was Frank.



Never happened. Twist said Frank was Iamnotgeorge2004.


It is the same person, his nic is iamnotgeorge his email is
iamnotgeorge2004 so yes you did call him Frank. It did happen even
though

your to stupid to relaize who you are calling what. You stupid
fuqqing
assclown


From: (I Am Not George)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb


So which one of you is wrong

You are.

is he frank, leland or is he george.

Frank is Iamnotgeorge2004.


Twisty is confused I told you I am not George I am Iamnotgeorge2004
but ItoldyouIamnotgeorge is not george wa3moj and Frank is not I Am
Not George who is not "george" at all but is just Frank. now read
closely assclowns

I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank
I am not Frank

pay attention steveo because I am deprograming you keyclowns from all
the hynosis Twisty has given you

I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj
I am not wa3moj

ok one last step and your free, lol

legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good
legal cb is good

"Frank Gilliland" in message-id:
wrote:


"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge"
wrote
in message ...
(I Am Not George) wrote in
m:

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg



heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool.

So is this little bro.

http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/



definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me

I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied
it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if
that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength
dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made
a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl
while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while
others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to
vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were
lost.

Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to
the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway
between horizontal and vertical polarization.

The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between
polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength
should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss
just from this antenna being bent.

Yet you stated....................................

"vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair."

When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge.
Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas
will easily beat your -3db antenna.

(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge) wrote:

Your too much big bro . roflmao 2x

lol, high five.

In ,
(gw) wrote:

snip

frank........twistie is a big skip talker ...didn't you know that???
he talks on channel 6......he is a big strapper........


That's the only way he can feel important -- imagining himself as a
'big man on the bowl'.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In , wrote:


I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied
it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if
that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength
dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made
a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl
while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while
others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to
vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were
lost.

Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to
the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway
between horizontal and vertical polarization.


Wrong. That represents an antenna with -both- horizontal and vertical
polarization.


The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between
polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength
should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss
just from this antenna being bent.


Wrong. The theoretical gain of the antenna for a given polarity is a
function equal to the sum of the gains of equally spaced tangents
along the curve of the antenna.


Yet you stated....................................

"vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair."


As measured by my FSM.


When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge.
Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas
will easily beat your -3db antenna.


I did not say that it dropped by 3dB. The phrase "by a hair" is not my
words but the words of my spotter, and both of us generally use that
phrase to describe a meter shift approximately equal to the width of
the needle. And since the FSM used was only a 'relative' FSM (as
opposed to a CISPR quasi-peak detector), there is no way to quantify
"by a hair", nor did I attempt to do so.







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote:
From: (Frank*Gilliland)
This
little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell,
"AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who
pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order.

Oh really? I don't think I have ever typed "akc"

in any of my posts until now.

Results 1 - 10 of about 402 for "Sparky" "akc". (0.60 seconds)*
Sorted by relevance* *Sort by date
Related groups:**rec.radio.cb

Very good, Twist.



LOL. Hey Frank, you should use a webtv somewhere some time. You're
having problems following who's who and need to understand how the thing
works.


Now search through each

one and count how many of those occurances
were quoted from another post instead of

typed by me.



Process of elimination serves quite nicely here. Check only those in the
search that are from you which contain the term "akc". You've used the
term quite regularly. Sobriety would permit return of your retainment
and not have you lying and claiming otherwise.


I guess you need another example of your communication deficit. In the
post at the following link, notice that I did not use the term "AKC"
but merely quoted the text that someone else typed:

http://tinyurl.com/33r6x

Since the post included the term, it will naturally be listed in any
search for "AKC" with me as the author -regardless- of whether I typed
it or not. Now, find some posts where I actually typed the term, and
find enough of them to back up your claims that it is one of my
"favorite terms" and/or that I "pioneered it".




=============

http://tinyurl.com/ytcah
http://tinyurl.com/2yor7
http://tinyurl.com/2sapq
(Twisty cast the first stone)

=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."

"...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough."

"Athis is how proper communication wroks..."

---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In blh1d01c2jc37p88751sl43a8hrefoj4ku@2355323778, Lancer
wrote:

snip
You fooled for minute with you nic. Glad that the your results were
close to the simulation. When I first started modeling I started with
a loop, cut it in half, moved it down to ground level and raised the
tip up.


That would explain the results.


Second the motion on getting Jay back here.


Yeah, well, he'd probably start harping on me again for being rude.
All the better.






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----