OPEN OFFER TO DEBATE TOM RAUCH W8JI: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Fractenna
crank-messages and innuendo to caste doubt and aspersion upon my work, fractal
antenna research, and me personally.
This is unacceptable to any professional scientist, such as myself.
I, on the other hand, will not respond in this unacceptable manner. Instead I
will repeat the offer to debate Mr. Rauch on the subject of fractal antennas at
an amateur radio convention, or elsewhere.
Such an offer was suggested by Phil, N1ZKT, last March, in hopes of getting Mr.
Rauch to respond for the Dayton Hamvention.
I will now pose this offer explictly and publicly: I will debate Mr. Rauch in
any large forum of his choosing. Weinie roasts and 160M mobile shootouts are
not large forums in this context.
The format is as follows: Mr. Rauch gets 25 minutes to say anything he wants on
fractal antennas and my work therein; I then have to defend the issue with 25
minutes; then there are 10 minutes of questions. As I will have no knowledge of
what Mr. Rauch will say, or what important issues he will bring to light, one
can see that from a debate standpoint, that I am at a disadvantage. Obviously I
do not feel threatened in any way by this weaker position.
If Mr. Rauch continues to pose me as undertaking fraudulent work; making
'miracle antennas', being schizophrenic or otherwise mentally disturbed; as a
threat to young children; and any other variety of false, defamatory
categorizations, it seems to me that his intent is clear. However, IF he wishes
to reveal that fractal antennas are pathological science or some other
inaccurate tag, here is his IDEAL means of demonstrating it.
I have full confidence that this will not occur because it cannot occur, as I
continue to be astounded at how little rational discussion is undertaken by
some folks here about something so easy to test and verify as a bent piece of
wire.
Some, but hardly all.
Take your best shot Tom; as a scientist and gentleman I am more than happy to
meet your challenge. Where do you want to meet?
If you do not reply, publicly, in two weeks time I will continue to remind
those on this NG how you chose not to--when appropriate.
Cordially,
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
Mr. Rauch has not responded to this.I will periodically remind him that this (a
public face to face debate) is THE forum to pose his questions and have them
answered.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
The only debate you need is with a qualified shrink.
73 Tom
Fractenna
>
>The only debate you need is with a qualified shrink.
>
>73 Tom
>
Once again, Mr. Rauch, you can only respond in a vituperative, defamatory
manner. Are you saying you will not engage in a debate? It seems to me that you
can at least be sufficiently civil to answer this question for the many who
now, and in the future will, read this post.
Its of litle consequence to me personally whether you debate or not.
The QUESTION is whether you have a RIGHT to HARRASS and DEFAME a legitimate
scientist undertaking legitimate scientific research, who has bent over
backwards to answer your questions over the years, and now sees that a public
face to face debate is the only civil, reasonable way to get you to 'put up or
shut up', as has been said on the NG.
Cordially,
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>Once again, Mr. Rauch, you can only respond in a vituperative, defamatory
>manner. Are you saying you will not engage in a debate? It seems to me that you
>can at least be sufficiently civil to answer this question for the many who
>now, and in the future will, read this post.
I doubt anyone, besides yourself and "others" who push your keyboard
keys, really cares. I know I don't.
>The QUESTION is whether you have a RIGHT to HARRASS and DEFAME a legitimate
>scientist undertaking legitimate scientific research, who has bent over
What a research position! No wonder you are so grumpy.
>backwards to answer your questions over the years, and now sees that a public
>face to face debate is the only civil, reasonable way to get you to 'put up or
>shut up', as has been said on the NG.
I don't understand. Debate what? You offer nothing of substance, only
some weird fixation that certain shapes make good antennas.
73 Tom
Fractenna
>From: 2w...@contesting.com (Tom W8JI)
>Date: Thu, 05 August 1999 07:11 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37aa16ef...@news.akorn.net>
If thinking is insightful and illuminating --its MENTALLY DISTURBED.
If there are efforts to understand the the relation of electromagnetics with
complex geometry forms--its WEIRDLY FIXATED.
Thank God that I have been given the blessings --which by YOUR set of
definitions, Mr. Rauch, make me "weridly fixated and mentally disturbed".
I am truly grateful to be this way.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
K1BQT
serious time on forensic debate and rhetoric--at a time when there was plenty
to talk about (probably why I'm so hard to get along with now). Despite your
nice offer to Tom, Chip, I gotta say the normal approach is for the "man with a
plan" to present first and for the rubuttal team to respond second (ever seen
a debate where the rebuttle team went first?? I haven't!). If you want to be
at the center of the universe, you gotta hang it out there, get it cut off, and
let a panel of neutral judges determine if the wound is fatal or superficial.
Rick K1BQT
Fractenna
>plan" to present first and for the rubuttal team to respond second (ever
>seen
>a debate where the rebuttle team went first?? I haven't!). If you want to
>be
>at the center of the universe, you gotta hang it out there, get it cut off,
>and
>let a panel of neutral judges determine if the wound is fatal or superficial.
>
>Rick K1BQT
>
That was EXACTLY what I offered Rick. Read it again.
Chip
Tom Bruhns
Fractenna wrote:
>
> Tom Rauch, W8JI, has continued in recent weeks to endeavor to use
> crank-messages and innuendo to caste doubt and aspersion upon my work, fractal
> antenna research, and me personally.
>
> This is unacceptable to any professional scientist, such as myself.
>
Why is it unacceptable? If you have confidence in your work, let your
work speak for itself, and ignore Tom Rauch.
It's disappointing to me that I seem to never see any substantive
details about your work (e.g. the fractal inverted F configuration) on
this group or on your web site. But I've come to accept that as just
the way it will be, and have decided that it's generally not worth my
effort to bother looking any longer. It has left me with the
impression, at least, that you don't care to have your work speak for
itself, at least not in a way I'm interested in.
Cheers,
Tom
Fractenna
>details about your work (e.g. the fractal inverted F configuration) on
>this group or on your web site.
Nope; and you won't see any of the inverted F stuff their either. Too bad. Its
a PRODUCT. Buy it and open it up if you are so interested.
If I go to the HP stites, will I get full documentation on their VNA's? How
they're put together/ Schematics, and so on?
The web site is not a library. If you want to dig out my publications, Tom, go
ahead. That should be more than 'substantive' for someone with your needs.
73
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>Nope; and you won't see any of the inverted F stuff their either. Too bad. Its
>a PRODUCT. Buy it and open it up if you are so interested.
It never fails to amaze me that when someone trys to help you, you try
your best to belittle or insult them.
I think the thing that upsets you most is you have no point to make.
You are still trying to make everyone think function follows form, and
are disappointed most people refuse to take your word for it.
As a smokescreen, you stir up a fight. Like Rick, I'm not going to
play your little head games any more. I've given up on convincing you
to go get the help you need. You (and the rest) are on your own.
73 Tom
Fractenna
>your best to belittle or insult them.
>
>I think the thing that upsets you most is you have no point to make.
>You are still trying to make everyone think function follows form, and
>are disappointed most people refuse to take your word for it.
>
>As a smokescreen, you stir up a fight. Like Rick, I'm not going to
>play your little head games any more. I've given up on convincing you
>to go get the help you need. You (and the rest) are on your own.
>
>73 Tom
>
Mr. Rauch, you have had three years to ask questions--and register the answers.
Instead we are treated to endless diatribes of abusiveness here, and elesewhere
on the 'net.
If you wish a civil, face to face debate on fractal antennas, I am willing to
participate. I am not willing to participate in your hatefest of distortion and
lies.
At this point it should have been self-evident that imputing a totally
reasonable and sane individual with mental problems is unacceptable. It
appears, after MUCH deliberation, you have come to the this (right) conclusion.
If you have something worth discusing on fractal antennas--then say it
publicly, in a civil debate.
If you want to abuse another individual--then keep it to yourself.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>>You are still trying to make everyone think function follows form, and
>>are disappointed most people refuse to take your word for it.
No Mr. Rauch; again, incorrect.My point is that your harrassment is without
merit. You are profoundly ignorant of fractal electromagnetics, and also
optimisation methods. You make outrageous statements, and then when answers are
given,you ignore them. Then you come back later and make the same outrageous
statements.
Unfortunately, you seem to take on the whole field of electromagnetic design
Mr. Rauch: genetic algorithm optimization is so endemic now that your comments
are now at odds with several hundred, and likely thousands of researchers and
designers. They are precisely using guided' trial and error' methods, such as
you contend are "The worst design approach(es) imaginable".
To continue, what I am saying is that your behaviour is morally wrong.
In fact, you have done this before. In 1996 and 1997 you jumped all over Rich
Measures on the net. In that case, some of your technical issues had merit. But
your comments were just extraordianrily destructive. It was only after you were
told that you were contributing to a serious health condition of Mr. Measures
that you
cut back.
Similar unbridled ham-harrassment happened, in part with Brian Beezley. There,
the hate was so extreme that people made DELIBERATE efforts to pirate his
software. He just closed the door on the ham community.
I am taking a stand, Mr. Rauch,because its just not right. Gratefully, I do not
have health issues to impede me, and I certainly am not going to close shop.
You have succeeded, to a small but very public degree, to propagandize. That
has wasted time.That has wasted my time: See, for example,
http://www.fractenna.com/ham/hampage4.html ).
But you seem to lecture about mental health, fear of corrupting young children
(can you believe it! That's one of Tom's tactics last Spring...); fraud;
yadayada.
What you WON'T DO is confront the SCIENCE ISSUE.
I repeat: I will cordially debate the subject of fractal antennas with Mr.
Rauch at any reasonably sized ham gathering--OF HIS CHOOSING. He has declined
to date. I will continue to remind him that this offer stands.
73 All,
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>>>I think the thing that upsets you most is you have no point to make.
>>>You are still trying to make everyone think function follows form, and
>>>are disappointed most people refuse to take your word for it.
>
>No Mr. Rauch; again, incorrect.My point is that your harrassment is without
>merit. You are profoundly ignorant of fractal electromagnetics, and also
>optimisation methods.
and exactly what are "Fractal Electromagnetics?
How do they differ from normal Electromagnetics?
Please explain.
73 Tom
R. L. Measures
W8JI) wrote:
€ Fractal Electromagnetics are way more esoteric than the normal kind?.
--
- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address
Fractenna
>
>73 Tom
>
Surely.
AFTEr you've looked at the dozen references I have listed for you over the
years, and DURING the debate.
May I suggest you try a web search.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>--
>- Rich... - 805-386-3734,
They are to some hams:-)
73,
Chip N1IR
Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.
My son came home from college this weekend and even though he's not a
ham, he brought up the subject of Fractal Antenna's and why wasn't I
using them.
Is there someplace on the web that explains these antenna's in such a
way that an old-timer can understand them?
TTUL
Gary
Fractenna
many wireless devices, especially at 900 MHz PCS, and 2.4 GHz.
I think you have a good sense at this point why I feel no immediacy into
putting more ham designs on the web site, or publishing more ham designs in
general. If the abuse didn't exist there would be fractal wire antennas for
160M-440MHz up now. I';ve been toying with the fractalized inverted F for 440
but see no interest so far.
THE FAQ and White paper (updating every few weeks) are the best sources of
general info. Beyond that, I am writing a review for a journal.
Other source: see http://www.fractenna.com and links within.
There was a paper in Applied Wireless which I do not feel provided much info,
but many people have seen it.
I no longer provide reprints of (older) papers, so recommending a bunch will
probably prove frustrating to find unless you have a good library.
I'll be happy to send you the Hohlfeld Cohen paper; just got more reprints.
Send me your address via e-mail.
73,
Chip N1IR
R. L. Measures
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
€ On your Web site, under introduction, it says:
"Fractal antennas evince an ability to work on many different bands, at
frequencies (most
of) which are not harmonically related. "
"envince" is not a word in the English language.
--
Fractenna
>
>"Fractal antennas evince an ability to work on many different bands, at
>frequencies (most
> of) which are not harmonically related. "
>
>"envince" is not a word in the English language.
>--
>- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address
>
GM Rich!
I suspect you read it wrong OM (having just got reading glasses for the first
time, I can relate to this :-D ); the word is 'evince'--spelled correctly--as
in :"to display clearly".
It appears on:
http://www.fractenna.com/wpmulti.html .
73 Rich,
Chip N1IR
Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.
I will visit the website!
TTUL
Gary
R. L. Measures
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
sorry, Chip. My mistake.
Most people would probably use the "demonstrate" instead of "evince".
Tom W8JI
>Surely.
>
>AFTEr you've looked at the dozen references I have listed for you over the
>years, and DURING the debate.
>
>May I suggest you try a web search.
>
>Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Do I understand you are saying you can't define "fractal
electromagnetics" and how it differs from normal "electromagnetics" in
a simple consise statement, or that true to your normal form you won't
tell anyone where specifically to look?
Fractenna
>electromagnetics" and how it differs from normal "electromagnetics" in
>a simple consise statement, or that true to your normal form you won't
>tell anyone where specifically to look?
No; I most certainly can and most certainly have--on this NG.
The aptness of a debate is that one can display vast amounts of published and
other visual info. Thus one TIME IS NOT WASTED, which is your crank intent.
C'mon Mr.Rauch. If I'm 1/10 the miscreant you make me out to be then a 1 hour
debate would do wonders to bolster your position.I will spend no more of my
time providing you info YOU should have already inverstigated.
Debate Mr. Rauch. There is no RATIONAL reason for you to back down--other than
the fact that there is no basis for your position.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>No; I most certainly can and most certainly have--on this NG.
I can't find it. No wher in your hundreds and thousands of rambling
posts is there a clear to the point statement or description of what
"Fractal Electromagnetics" is.
Perhaps you can repost it.
>The aptness of a debate is that one can display vast amounts of published and
>other visual info. Thus one TIME IS NOT WASTED, which is your crank intent.
I find it amazing that you know other people's intent.
>C'mon Mr.Rauch. If I'm 1/10 the miscreant you make me out to be then a 1 hour
>debate would do wonders to bolster your position.I will spend no more of my
>time providing you info YOU should have already inverstigated.
I don't "make you out to be anything". You represent yourself, not me.
>Debate Mr. Rauch. There is no RATIONAL reason for you to back down--other than
>the fact that there is no basis for your position.
Debate what? No one could possibly debate someone who never makes
definite points, or who fails to answer simple questions.
Exactly what is Fractal Electromagnetics? What is your "special" claim
that you wish to defend?
Forrest Gehrke
>
> >€ Fractal Electromagnetics are way more esoteric than the normal kind?.
>
between Maxwell's electromagnetics and the Fractal kind?
Why do you evade the question while continually offering
to debate? As someone else posted, in a debate the one
wanting a debate states his position first and then comes
the rebuttal.
//
k2bt
Fractenna
>to debate? As someone else posted, in a debate the one
>wanting a debate states his position first and then comes
>the rebuttal.
>//
> k2bt
>
That very simple question is easily answered by a web search.
Mr. Rauch uses crank-tactics. IF he wishes to debate, then it will require
homework on his part. I cannot, and will not, do it for him.
If YOU want the answer to this question, I will gladly answer it. Join the list
at fractal...@onelist.com. Go to onelist.com and sign up.
Happy to help.
73
Chip N1IR
Tom Bruhns
Fractenna wrote:
> If I go to the HP stites, will I get full documentation on their VNA's? How
> they're put together/ Schematics, and so on?
You will find the HP Journal on the web now. It used to be available by
free subscription. Web publication is simply more economical. It has,
from the beginning AFAIK, had a great deal of technical information:
the, "Aha, so THAT'S how they did it!" sort of stuff. We like showing
off our work; we're proud of it, frankly. Full documentation? Of
course not. But certainly technical details. Details about software.
Details about why circuits were done the way they were, with diagrams.
Details about certain important mechanical constructions. Details about
semiconductor processes used to get certain interesting properties.
Cheers,
Tom
Fractenna
>free subscription. Web publication is simply more economical. It has,
>from the beginning AFAIK, had a great deal of technical information:
>the, "Aha, so THAT'S how they did it!" sort of stuff. We like showing
>off our work; we're proud of it, frankly. Full documentation? Of
>course not. But certainly technical details. Details about software.
>Details about why circuits were done the way they were, with diagrams.
>Details about certain important mechanical constructions. Details about
>semiconductor processes used to get certain interesting properties.
>
>Cheers,
>Tom
>
So the answer to my question is: "no".
Now: what is it you want to know about the performance of this fractalized
inverted F, which has not been said already?
Cheers,
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>Now: what is it you want to know about the performance of this fractalized
>inverted F, which has not been said already?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Chip N1IR
The inverted F is a simple concept, nothing I see that is amazing or
innovative there. Works on the same basic principles as any other
antenna.
I think the puzzlement is what you call "Fractal Electromagnetics".
Can you describe Fractal Electromagnetics and tell us how it differs
from conventional Electromagnetics? Or point us to the part of a
single clearly written reference (readily available) that describes
it?
73 Tom
Fractenna
>innovative there. Works on the same basic principles as any other
>antenna.
I agree; the inverted F has been around for many years and is well-studied and
its limitations are well-known. That's why I only work with innovative, small,
high performance --fractalized--inverted F's, which please our customers who
have this need.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Lumpy
>
> ...I will spend no more of my
> time providing you info YOU
> should have already inverstigated.
I'm not counting. How many times have
we heard that.
Let's see...I go into the store to buy
a mattress and ask 'Why is your mattress
better than brand X'.
The store owner gets all huffy and says
'If you'd just search the net for all the
previous rants I've made, you would know'.
Lumpy AB0GD
--
The Very Unofficial Colorado APRS Page
http://www.digitalcartography.com
Fractenna
libraries--or writings even--and everyone got their knowledge solely by sitting
around the feeble fire and praying that the shaman would drop a word or too.
When is the last time you were in a library, OM? I was in yesterday.
73,
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>Great attitude lumpy! A throwback to the oral tradition, where there were no
>libraries--or writings even--and everyone got their knowledge solely by sitting
>around the feeble fire and praying that the shaman would drop a word or too.
>
>When is the last time you were in a library, OM? I was in yesterday.
I'd bet money our resident newsgroup scientwist is a popular in the
library at BU as he is here.
73 Tom
Fractenna
>library at BU as he is here.
>
>73 Tom
I don't know who you are referring to. Or WHAT you are referring to:"...a
popular.."...what?
I was at the town library yesterday Tom; when is the last time YOU visited a
library?
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
Hi Fractenna, Hi Nate,
>I was at the town library yesterday Tom;
I assume you had a photo-op session there with the press and the
many, many students who admire your warm fuzzy friendly helpful
personality.
>when is the last time YOU visited a library?
>Nate
Don't know about the library, but I go to the bathroom every day. You
should try it sometime, you might not be so grumpy and mean to
everyone.
73 Tom
Fractenna
which can and will do much to clear the bogus air of doubt which Mr. Rauch has
introduced on this subject, and inveighed as--his statement--"personal crap"
against me, since August 1996.
Through the years, I have made offers to Mr. Rauch to send papers, models, and
even a fractal antenna to him, all of which he ignored or sidestepped. These
offers are a matter of public record, on the archives of this NG. Furthermore,
Mr. Rauch knows that a reasonably extensive list of fractal antenna articles
exists and many of these references have been listed here, again on this NG.
At present, Mr. Rauch is taking the tact of asking me questions, which he has
asked and I have answered many times before. His latest affectation is to ask
"what is fractal electromagentics" (sic), a question which is so obvious and
basic that it indicates an unwillingness to explore the subject at all.
Mr. Rauch, I and others cannot do your homework for you. It is not an issue of
character or subterfuge or knowledge if an expert in the field refuses to
answer your questions--the same ones asked years and years in time. YOU need to
get the answers. That is why books, and libraries, and journals, and
magazines, and CD's exist. It is not my failing if I answer your question and
you repeat it again and again.
If you have any children, then you must realize that at some point, the curious
mind needs to be guided and not spoon fed. In the absence of such, there is no
other interpretation then your task being solely to harrass and keep the
crank-turning.
I will continue to remind this NG that you fail to accept this offer to debate,
until you concede that you are not sufficiently informed and interested to make
a qualified statement regarding fractal antennas and my body of work on such.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>I will continue to remind this NG that you fail to accept this offer to debate,
>until you concede that you are not sufficiently informed and interested to make
>a qualified statement regarding fractal antennas and my body of work on such.
I don't see anything debatible, unless we include mental health
issues! I'm sure Ellie, Phil, Hy, Chip, Fractenna, the Equalizer, and
all the others on your team have something to contribute to that
topic.
>Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
You too Nate. The main thing I'm interested in is seeing you get some
quality help from a real doctor.
"Fractals, more than science...... they're an obsession."
Fractenna
>I don't see anything debatible, unless we include mental health
>issues! I'm sure Ellie, Phil, Hy, Chip, Fractenna, the Equalizer, and
>all the others on your team have something to contribute to that
>topic.
>
>>Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
>
>You too Nate. The main thing I'm interested in is seeing you get some
>quality help from a real doctor.
>
My name is not Nate.
Your comments above indicates a total sense of delusion. Neither accurate nor
founded in reality.
Mr. Rauch, I would be HAPPY to talk to a psychiatrist. As I have never done so
before, it may be a fun exercise, although hardly appropriate when one is
mentally healthy--as is my case.
However, I am willing to assuage your concerns. Why don't you call MaClaen
Hospital up here in Belmont MA and make me an appointment. You pay for the
first. If for some reason more 'visits' are needed I'll pay the rest.
Sound fair? What easier check can you have--or a fairer one to demonstrate your
pernicious, unfounded, and destructive harrassment?
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
>"Fractals, more than science...... they're an obsession (of harrassment for
me)."--Tom Rauch
Fractenna
>>all the others on your team have something to contribute to that
>>topic.
>
>This would be a *great* time for a group photo of the Fractenna development
>group and staff to be posted here as a binary.
>Perhaps someone could be holding a model of one of their soon-to-be-released
>UHF antennas in the shot. As someone who has always found the subject of
>antennas fascinating, I'd look forward to seeing it. Thanks!
>
'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people, affiliated with Fractal Antenna
Systems, Inc. Mr. Rauch is attempted to associate a ficititous character and
one I am suing with the group. More specifically, he is attempting to get
everyone to think that these are ALL one person.
Sick.
NC
Tom W8JI
> More specifically, he is attempting to get
>everyone to think that these are ALL one person.
>
> Sick.NC
Hi Sick NC,
Sorry I forgot to mention you.
>'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people, affiliated with Fractal Antenna
>Systems, Inc.
Sorry I'm so dense. I've got it now. Ellie, Chip, Nathan, Hy, Phil,
Fractenna, Sick NC, and the rest are all different personalities who
just happen to share one keyboard (for some reason) and they, or at
least some of them, are also affiliated with Fractal Antenna Systems,
Inc. I assume since they share keyboards and e-mail access (under the
name "Fractenna") they also car pool to work (in the Bentmobile?).
Sounds like an interesting "group".
Fractenna
Here's something far more interesting. Is it a real person?
A lonely, bitter ham isolated in a rural community, with a divorce of long
standing and a relationship lacking. Spiteful; bitter; threatened easily.
An arrest record from his younger days which he hopes to forget; an alcoholic
problem which he pretends doesn't exist.
More dirt, but then again one must be charitable.
Who could THIS possibly be?
Who?
73,
Chip N1IR
Mike Lucas W5CHR
Fractenna wrote in message >'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people,
affiliated with Fractal Antenna
>Systems, Inc.
Please be sure to get a picture that includes Harvey, please.
Mike Lucas W5CHR
Memphis, Tenn
Fractenna
>> More specifically, he is attempting to get
>>everyone to think that these are ALL one person.
>>
>> Sick.NC
>
>Hi Sick NC,
>
>Sorry I forgot to mention you.
Only with Tom rauch can the descriptor become the describer:
<<**ORIGINALLY**
...ALL one person.
Sick.
NC>>
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
If Mr. Rauch will set up and participate in a debate, I will happily send him a
hardcopy library of all the essential fractal antenna references. He can then
use them to construct his side of the debate.
I, on the other hand, will ask for no information beyond that already in my
possession.
IF Mr. Rauch is not a crank, and not MERELY obsessed with character
assassination; false accusation;libel; defamation; harrassment; and so on, then
surely this will be more than reasonable indication of his desire to critique
fractal antennas and air his side in a cohesive, objective fashion--as opposed
to 3 years(plus) of murky mischief.
You have asked, Mr. Rauch, to stop the "personal crap". Here is your
opportunity.
Cordially,
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
<luca...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>Fractenna wrote in message >'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people,
>affiliated with Fractal Antenna
>>Systems, Inc.
>
>Please be sure to get a picture that includes Harvey, please.
Harvey is like the St. Bernard on Topper. You'll never see him on
film.
Fractenna
>Harvey is like the St. Bernard on Topper. You'll never see him on
>film.
>
Harvey is an imaginary illusion conjured upon alcoholic indulgence--at least
that's what I remember in the movie. So if I am Harvey, shall we assume that I
am a pure illusion--or a drunk?
Neither is accurate Mr. Rauch.
I do not drink Mr. Rauch--unless you consider a diet coke 'drinking'.
How 'bout you, Mr. Rauch. Do YOU drink? Like the lead character in the movie
'Harvey'--do you drink a weeee too much? Tell us about it. Deny if you wish.
Just thought you'd like to fill us in.
73,
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>>
>>Harvey is like the St. Bernard on Topper. You'll never see him on
>>film.
>>
>Harvey is an imaginary illusion conjured upon alcoholic indulgence--at least
>that's what I remember in the movie. So if I am Harvey, shall we assume that I
>am a pure illusion--or a drunk?
That's an odd response to my statement Harvey is a ghost. What movie
was Harvey in? I thought he was one of the operators at Fractenna's
keyboard, I didn't know he was a real character like Ellie.
73 Tom
W6RCecilA
> That's an odd response to my statement Harvey is a ghost. What movie
> was Harvey in?
I believe "Harvey" was the name of the movie starring James Stewart.
Harvey was an invisible six (or was it eight?) foot tall rabbit.
--
73, Cecil, W6RCA http://www.bigfoot.com/~w6rca
Tom W8JI
wrote:
>I believe "Harvey" was the name of the movie starring James Stewart.
>Harvey was an invisible six (or was it eight?) foot tall rabbit.
That's what I thought, but Chip should know. Harvey posts from his
address.
Fractenna
>That's what I thought, but Chip should know. Harvey posts from his
>address.
>
I will further show how magnanimous I am on this matter.
Fractenna
>keyboard, I didn't know he was a real character like Ellie.
>
>73 Tom
>
>
>
R. L. Measures
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
€ What's to debate on fractal antennas? They seem to be more suited for
UHF apps. Tom is seemingly not into UHF.
RE: "personal crap". My guess is that the kind of personal crap that
Tom would like to cut is references to embarrassing letters he wrote, as
well as gems from my Very Interesting Quotes Archive.
--
- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address
Fractenna
>€ What's to debate on fractal antennas? They seem to be more suited for
>UHF apps. Tom is seemingly not into UHF.
I have fractal antennas up for 20M, 30M, and 10m right now Rich:-)
>RE: "personal crap". My guess is that the kind of personal crap that
>Tom would like to cut is references to embarrassing letters he wrote, as
>well as gems from my Very Interesting Quotes Archive.
>--
I think that anything which is illustrative of the reasons behind Mr. Rauch's
behavior is fair game, given his ATTEMPTS at making me look like someone with
profound 'personal' problems--all antisocial.
As his responses here are not guided by knowledge; reason; or objective
critique, we All need to know why he goes ON and ON with his invective.
If, for example, we understood that he had an organic condition--such as
alcoholism--which drove him to this obsessive behavior then I would do my best
to help him, just as I helped a colleague. BUT getting that person to ADMIT to
the problem was the impediment to progress.
So, I will ask another time: Mr.Rauch: are you an alcoholic? A simple yes or no
would sufice. I am not slandering or accusing you of anything; I want to better
understand your poor behavior, ongoing for over 3 years.
73,
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>I think that anything which is illustrative of the reasons behind Mr. Rauch's
>behavior is fair game, given his ATTEMPTS at making me look like someone with
>profound 'personal' problems--all antisocial.
The good Dr., made to look anti-social? No way!
>As his responses here are not guided by knowledge; reason; or objective
>critique, we All need to know why he goes ON and ON with his invective.
Because its fun.
>So, I will ask another time: Mr.Rauch: are you an alcoholic? A simple yes or no
>would sufice. I am not slandering or accusing you of anything; I want to better
>understand your poor behavior, ongoing for over 3 years.
Looking for complex answers to simple questions will lead nowhere. I
have been blessed with a non-addictive personality, except I do tend
to scratch my armpits a lot lately. So the answer is no, Chip. My
drink of choice is water or milk, not that it matters.
The answer to why I "poke" at you is actually simple. You are
generally rude and condesending to anyone who disagrees with you, and
although you "might" be a PhD you obviously don't understand antennas
well. You can't stand answering questions, probably because you have
no answers and a lack of self-esteem or self-worth prevents you from
tolerating one-on-one questions and straight answers.
Now from time to time many people have problems with others. For
example, I sometimes disagree with what Reg might say. But Reg, unlike
you, is always willing to explain his position and from that people
learn something. For an example of professional behavior, I suggest
you read Roy Lewallen, Kevin Schmidt, Tom Bruhns, or Gary Coffman's
posts. There are actually many others that are good examples also.
With you, it is a one way street. You are a megalomaniac who basically
likes to spew balogonia and support it by claiming you are a PhD or
any disagreements are "personal".
If you look back, it actually isn't me who harrasses you. It is many
dozens of people, including your former school mates who say you were
a problem in school. One fellow claims Carl Sagan, who you claim wrote
a character into his book because he "liked you", used to go through
extremes to avoid contact with you.
Perhaps that isn't true, but it seems to fit.
Does you mother like you? Does she consider you a nice person?
W6KKT lost it with you, then Chris Trask, then Mike Lucas, and on and
on one right after another. People honestly dislike you Chip, and
loose it because they can't deal with someone who refuses to behave
like a normal mature human being.
If someone doesn't answer you, or "pick on you", it is probably
because they just tune you out having written you off as a lost cause.
Myself...I think there might be hope, if you admit you need help. If
my prodding you causes that to happen, then I have accomplished my
goal.
I seriously think you need to get some medical attention.
I hope this all did some good. I hate to see anyone waste a good
education through self-destructive behavior. Especially with all the
help available today.
73 Tom
Fractenna
It is important to understand why you are so obsessed. And, I agree, if a
fraction of what you said here is TRUE, then there are profound issues to be
dealt with.
Fortunately, you are inaccurate to a 100% level on matters of fact, motivation,
and so on.
Which one woulkd you like refuted and exposed first?
What a relief to know that your motivations are so simple and so wrong!
In any case, whether your motivation has a "perceived' basis or not, what you
are doing is wrong. It has ruined a perfectly good NG, and misled others to the
point of the media picking up on it. That's irrespective of the damage you have
attempting to inflict upon me, and Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. [NOTE: Mr.
RAUCH WORKS for MFJ Enterprises, a major maker of antennas.]
If you don't like someone Tom, then go find those you like. Its a big world,
and I will be around and kicking for many, many years. My health--both mental
and physical-- is excellent and I enjoy informing others, Nothing you have,
are, or will do can stop that.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>>dozens of people, including your former school mates who say you were
>>a problem in school.
Fascinating! Feel free to quote and jsutify this false assertion:-)
One fellow claims Carl Sagan, who you claim wrote
>>a character into his book because he "liked you", used to go through
>>extremes to avoid contact with you.
>>
Nope. "Like" is not the issue. I would be fascinated to know more about this
"extremes to avoid contact". [What a wonderful pun!] Fill us in! This is good
stuff! Let's get the 'real dirt' as they say!--or are you lying again Mr.
Rauch?
A: YES:-)
73, Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>Thank you Tom,
>
>It is important to understand why you are so obsessed. And, I agree, if a
>fraction of what you said here is TRUE, then there are profound issues to be
>dealt with.
I'm not "obsessed, you are. I went away for a year and you continued
to blame me for your lack of credibility. A seach through Dejanews
will prove that true.
It is only after your long pleas for help that I finally responded to
your repeated requests for my approvial or attention.
>Which one woulkd you like refuted and exposed first?
How about explaining the theory behind "fractal electromagentics" and
how it divvers from conventional electromagnetics?
>In any case, whether your motivation has a "perceived' basis or not, what you
>are doing is wrong. It has ruined a perfectly good NG, and misled others to the
>point of the media picking up on it. That's irrespective of the damage you have
>attempting to inflict upon me, and Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. [NOTE: Mr.
>RAUCH WORKS for MFJ Enterprises, a major maker of antennas.]
A few weeks ago you claimed you didn't know where I worked. A few
weeks later you claimed I worked for Hy-Gain. Now you claim MFJ.
When a person lies, he often looses track of what he said days before.
You fit that case to a T.
>If you don't like someone Tom, then go find those you like. Its a big world,
>and I will be around and kicking for many, many years. My health--both mental
>and physical-- is excellent and I enjoy informing others, Nothing you have,
>are, or will do can stop that.
Then quit calling me for attention. Stop your insane multiple posts
under multiple signatures that beg for attention if you don't want the
attention you get. Quit asking for a "debate", when you can't even
describe what your "theory" is.
If anything you say has any merit, it will stand alone no matter what
I think. That's especially true if you learn how to speak clearly.
73 Tom
>Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>>a character into his book because he "liked you", used to go through
>>extremes to avoid contact with you.
>>
>>
If its not true, then why say it?
IF someone said this--even in jest--then tell us who it is?
Face it Tom; your intend is to publicly harrass and defame me. At any cost. The
question is: Why?
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>>well.
So, am I a Ph.D. or not? You've introduced the doubt; so resolve it. You are
welcome to drop by my office and see my Ph.D. In fact, let me read from the
parchment:
"CORNELL UNIVERSITY
Be it known that Nathaniel L. Cohen has satisfied in full the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy has been admitted to that degree with all
the rights, priveleges and honors pertaining thereto in witness of this action
the seal of the University and the signatures authorized by the Board of
Trustees are affixed below. Given at Ithaca, New York, on the 23rd day of
January, in the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty five.
Signed
Alison Casarett (Dean)
Frank Rhodes (President) "
I agree: I most certainly do not understand antennas--at least to a level in
which I am satisfied. It will undoubtedly be a life long quest. But certain
gems come up after much work and fortitude--such as the basic property by which
an antenna is invariant with frequency.
Nature is humbling and fascinating. And lots of fun to understand! I LOVE
answering questions as well as POSING them.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Fractenna
>>As his responses here are not guided by knowledge; reason; or objective
>>critique, we All need to know why he goes ON and ON with his invective.
>
>Because its fun.
>
Let me get this straight: you are saying the REASON you slander, libel and
defame is "because its fun".
In other words, you have no basis for your harrassment, accusations, and so on.
Instead, you do it "because its fun".
In other words, you accuse me and Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. of fraud
"because its fun".
You call me mentally disturbed; a cannibal, a threat to small children; a liar;
a plagiarist; a urinating primate; a fraud; and so on:"because its fun".
I strongly urge you to ask your attorney whether your predilection for fun is
acceptable.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
R. L. Measures
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
>Rich sed:
>
>>€ What's to debate on fractal antennas? They seem to be more suited for
>>UHF apps. Tom is seemingly not into UHF.
>
>I have fractal antennas up for 20M, 30M, and 10m right now Rich:-)
>
€ Do you have a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna?
>>RE: "personal crap". My guess is that the kind of personal crap that
>>Tom would like to cut is references to embarrassing letters he wrote, as
>>well as gems from my Very Interesting Quotes Archive.
>>--
>
>I think that anything which is illustrative of the reasons behind Mr. Rauch's
>behavior is fair game, given his ATTEMPTS at making me look like someone with
>profound 'personal' problems--all antisocial.
>
>As his responses here are not guided by knowledge; reason; or objective
>critique, we All need to know why he goes ON and ON with his invective.
>
€ My guess is that there was a misfortunate glitch in early childhood.
>.........
--
JerryL
bickering someplace else. If you don't like what the other is saying, its
simple, don't read and/or don't respond! Reading/posting ones diploma on the
Internet is really in poor taste... For Christs sake people, grow up, both of
you!!!
Fractenna <frac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990819120704...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
Tom W8JI
Measures) wrote:
>€ My guess is that there was a misfortunate glitch in early childhood.
>>.........
>--
>- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address
That would be my guess also.
73 Tom
W6RCecilA
>
> (R. L. Measures) wrote:
> >€ My guess is that there was a misfortunate glitch in early childhood.
>
I had an aunt who, when I was a young whippersnapper, always tried
to smother me with her gigantic mammary glands while she hugged me.
Ever since then, I have enjoyed being smothered.
Fractenna
>>critique, we All need to know why he goes ON and ON with his invective.
>>
Mr. Rauch's childhood is not my concern. He must take responsibility for his
adult behavior.
Nathan Cohen.Ph.D.
Fractenna
>
>
What event was it Tom? have you discussed thi traumatiiizing event in your
early life with a qualified professional?
73
Chip N1IR
Fractenna
>to smother me with her gigantic mammary glands while she hugged me.
>Ever since then, I have enjoyed being smothered.
>--
>73, Cecil, W6RCA http://www.bigfoot.com/~w6rca
>
Gee Cecil, you strike me as a Grand Tetons kinda QTH-person rather than flat
flat Texas.
73
Chip N1IR
R. L. Measures
W8JI) wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 17:28:39 GMT, meas...@vcnet.com (R. L.
>Measures) wrote:
>
>>€ My guess is that there was a misfortunate glitch in early childhood.
>>>.........
>>--
>>- Rich... - 805-386-3734, take away plus from e-mail address
>
>That would be my guess also.
>
€ You are the person who knows, Tom
kk...@my-deja.com
In reading the post below it occurs to me that the 75M
Fractenna must be up and running.
Lighten up Chip you look pretty silly posting stuff like this.
In article <19990818153213...@ng-fc1.aol.com>,
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
> >
> >On 18 Aug 1999 12:12:20 GMT, frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
> >> More specifically, he is attempting to get
> >>everyone to think that these are ALL one person.
> >>
> >> Sick.NC
> >
> >Hi Sick NC,
> >
> >Sorry I forgot to mention you.
> >
> >>'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people, affiliated with Fractal
Antenna
> >>Systems, Inc.
> >
> >Sorry I'm so dense. I've got it now. Ellie, Chip, Nathan, Hy, Phil,
> >Fractenna, Sick NC, and the rest are all different personalities who
> >just happen to share one keyboard (for some reason) and they, or at
> >least some of them, are also affiliated with Fractal Antenna Systems,
> >Inc. I assume since they share keyboards and e-mail access (under the
> >name "Fractenna") they also car pool to work (in the Bentmobile?).
> >
> >Sounds like an interesting "group".
> >
> >
>
> Here's something far more interesting. Is it a real person?
>
> A lonely, bitter ham isolated in a rural community, with a divorce of
long
> standing and a relationship lacking. Spiteful; bitter; threatened
easily.
>
> An arrest record from his younger days which he hopes to forget; an
alcoholic
> problem which he pretends doesn't exist.
>
> More dirt, but then again one must be charitable.
>
> Who could THIS possibly be?
>
> Who?
>
> 73,
> Chip N1IR
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Dan K Nelson
news:x9Xu3.14186$gO1.4...@news2.giganews.com...
> Why don't you two imature 'people' ( I hesitate to say adults) take your
> bickering someplace else. If you don't like what the other is saying, its
> simple, don't read and/or don't respond! Reading/posting ones diploma on
the
> Internet is really in poor taste... For Christs sake people, grow up, both
of
> you!!!
>
>
> jloc...@lightspeed.net
>
> Fractenna <frac...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:19990819120704...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> > >>although you "might" be a PhD you obviously don't understand antennas
> > >>well.
AMEN to that! I got so tired of seeing their petty drivel that I added both
parties' names to my Spam Block filter, but I guess some folks do not have
this ability.
73 de W6DKN
Russ Renaud
Take it to e-mail, ladies!
--
73 de va3rr/aa8lu
http://www.qsl.net/va3rr
Tom W8JI
>What event was it Tom? have you discussed thi traumatiiizing event in your
>early life with a qualified professional?
There are few qualified professionals today. Most doctors can't even
spell correctly.
Fractenna
>parties' names to my Spam Block filter, but I guess some folks do not have
>this ability.
>
>
>
The solution is simple: have Mr. rauch stop his slander defamation, libel, and
just plain silliness and then you will have no complaints. I need change
nothing.
73,
Chip n1IR
Fractenna
on how Mr. Rauch looks? Hmmm?
73
Chip N1IR
Fractenna
>From: 2w...@contesting.com (Tom W8JI)
>Date: Thu, 19 August 1999 12:01 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37bc2604...@news.akorn.net>
>
>On 19 Aug 1999 15:38:21 GMT, frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
>>Thank you Tom,
>>
>>It is important to understand why you are so obsessed. And, I agree, if a
>>fraction of what you said here is TRUE, then there are profound issues to be
>>dealt with.
>
>I'm not "obsessed, you are. I went away for a year and you continued
>to blame me for your lack of credibility. A seach through Dejanews
>will prove that true.
>
Nope; you changed venues. Many search engines list your outrageous and
misleading towertalk and antenna lists posts. These are public access.
>It is only after your long pleas for help that I finally responded to
>your repeated requests for my approvial or attention.
>
Perhaps you should quote one. Where's that plea, Mr. Rauch?
>>Which one woulkd you like refuted and exposed first?
>
>How about explaining the theory behind "fractal electromagentics" and
>how it divvers from conventional electromagnetics?
>
I will be happy to send you the references--as hardcopies--when you agree to
debate. No problem.
>>In any case, whether your motivation has a "perceived' basis or not, what
>you
>>are doing is wrong. It has ruined a perfectly good NG, and misled others to
>the
>>point of the media picking up on it. That's irrespective of the damage you
>have
>>attempting to inflict upon me, and Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. [NOTE: Mr.
>>RAUCH WORKS for MFJ Enterprises, a major maker of antennas.]
>
>A few weeks ago you claimed you didn't know where I worked.
Nope. Not true. Why not post this? You won't because you can't. As usual.
A few
>weeks later you claimed I worked for Hy-Gain. Now you claim MFJ.
Nope. Never claimed that.Again, you are unable to show this because it wasn't
said.
>
>When a person lies, he often looses track of what he said days before.
>You fit that case to a T.
>
YES! You fit that case to a T! I couldn't have said it better!
>>If you don't like someone Tom, then go find those you like. Its a big world,
>>and I will be around and kicking for many, many years. My health--both
>mental
>>and physical-- is excellent and I enjoy informing others, Nothing you have,
>>are, or will do can stop that.
>
>Then quit calling me for attention. Stop your insane multiple posts
>under multiple signatures that beg for attention if you don't want the
>attention you get.
Mr. Rauch, I don't want your attention.I want you to not slander; lie; defame;
libel; accuse; and so on. If you stop that--why, then, what's the problem?
> Quit asking for a "debate", when you can't even
>describe what your "theory" is.
>
I don't have a "theory". I have a published body of work on fractal antennas.
Which you have refuted now for --3-- years. Either get with the KNOWLEDGE BASE
or keep quiet.IF you think I'm "all wet" to use the vernacular, then SHOW IT.
Visual data is key.
I note, for example, that you have not attempted to put up a web page. That
would be EASIEST thing in the world, to show that I'm "all wet"--if this were
so (which it isn't).
I bet there are dozens here who will volunteer web space--just to get you off
your obsession.
>If anything you say has any merit, it will stand alone no matter what
>I think. That's especially true if you learn how to speak clearly.
No Mr. Rauch;the clock has ticked. the 'merit' issue is well beyond you. When
fractal element antennas were new; and I was the only one publishing; and no
one had corroborated; and so on, the 'merit' issue was potentially an 'IF'
question. But, in reality, the "merit" issue evaporated in January 1996. IF YOU
HAD READ ANY of the references I have posted on this NG and elsewhere through
the years you would know this.
The question TODAY is: what right does a crank have to defame a serious;
productive, innovative scientist? Why should I be asked to respond to your
nonsense Mr. rauch? Why have three reporters asked me WHY THERE WAS NO DEBATE?
The answer: YOU can't debate what isn't so. Because you are a crank.
You want to treat fractal antennas like they're some kind of Roswell
Incident--and you are some white knight exposing the fraud. Well, here's your
chance! D E B A T E ! But there is no fraud; fractal electromagnetics is now an
established and frontier branch--at the cutting edge. The less you accept
this--just as you fail to accept that guided trial and error methods (such as
genetic algorithms) are an important component in antenna design--the more you
fight reality, and the MORE YOU DECIDE I'M YOUR PUNCHING bag.
You even admit doing it--"because its fun".
I am committed to stopping your behavior by measured, accurate response at
every turn. Three years of your abuse is 3 years too much.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
>
>73 Tom
>
>
Wes Stewart
[snip]
Sorry, I can't help myself. This thread has gone so far from any meaningful
subject, I might as well put in my two cents.
>
>I do not drink Mr. Rauch--unless you consider a diet coke 'drinking'.
As the saying goes, "Never trust a man who doesn't drink."
73,
N7WhiskeySoda
Fractenna
>subject, I might as well put in my two cents.
>>
>>I do not drink Mr. Rauch--unless you consider a diet coke 'drinking'.
>
>As the saying goes, "Never trust a man who doesn't drink."
>
>73,
>
>N7WhiskeySoda
>
>
the young age of 44, and the realization that we don't live forever--so get on
with it. I don't take drugs either.
If you wish to drink, it doesn't bug me, but if you drink to excess, I pray for
your health.
73,
Chip N1IR
R. L. Measures
meas...@vcnet.com (R. L. Measures) wrote:
>In article <19990819085213...@ng-cb1.aol.com>,
>frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
>
>>Rich sed:
>>
>>>€ What's to debate on fractal antennas? They seem to be more suited for
>>>UHF apps. Tom is seemingly not into UHF.
>>
>>I have fractal antennas up for 20M, 30M, and 10m right now Rich:-)
>>
>€ Do you have a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna?
>
€ Chip: Now that your hairpull with Tom Rauch is apparently at a
temporary lull, I would like to see a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna.
kk...@my-deja.com
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > In reading the post below it occurs to me that the 75M
> > Fractenna must be up and running.
> >
> > Lighten up Chip you look pretty silly posting stuff like this.
> >
> >In article <19990818153213...@ng-fc1.aol.com>,
>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> A lonely, bitter ham isolated in a rural community, with a divorce
of
> >long
> >> standing and a relationship lacking. Spiteful; bitter; threatened
> >easily.
> >>
> >> An arrest record from his younger days which he hopes to forget; an
> >alcoholic
> >> problem which he pretends doesn't exist.
> >>
> >> More dirt, but then again one must be charitable.
> >>
> >> Who could THIS possibly be?
> >>
> >> Who?
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Chip N1IR
> >>
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
> >
> ...and, getting an objective perspective what shall we suppose is your
opinion
> on how Mr. Rauch looks? Hmmm?
>
> 73
> Chip N1IR
>
When I met Mr. Rauch he seemed like a nice enough fellow if a bit
distracted, But Mr. Rauch is not the issue. The issue is your post
it reminds me a lot of a TV show I watched in the fifties, full
of accusations and innuendo. Do you really believe this is appropriate
behavior for an academic? These veiled references to past events
which may or may not of ever happened are reminiscent of the morons
who inhabit--or did before enforcement began--certain segments of
75M that was and is my only point. I should think a learned person
such as yourself would hold to a higher standard of conduct.
Oh the TV show, the Army/McCarthy hearings.
Fractenna
>€ Chip: Now that your hairpull with Tom Rauch is apparently at a
>temporary lull, I would like to see a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna.
>--
>- Rich...
Sure Rich; it will be up some time in October on the fractenna ham page.
73
Chip N1IR
Fractenna
> distracted, But Mr. Rauch is not the issue. The issue is your post
> it reminds me a lot of a TV show I watched in the fifties, full
> of accusations and innuendo. Do you really believe this is appropriate
> behavior for an academic? These veiled references to past events
> which may or may not of ever happened are reminiscent of the morons
> who inhabit--or did before enforcement began--certain segments of
> 75M that was and is my only point. I should think a learned person
> such as yourself would hold to a higher standard of conduct.
>
> Oh the TV show, the Army/McCarthy hearings.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
I can see that you have bias which favbors Mr. rauch's proclivity to defame;
livel; slander; lie; and so on.
That is most sad; but important to know so I can have a perspective on your
point of view.
I am proud to be an academic and am totally confortable with my responses.
73,
Chip N1IR
K1BQT
Oppps--just got coffee up my nose!
Rick K1BQT
Gilbert M.
Fractenna a écrit dans le message <19990818081220...@ng-cb1.aol.com>...
>'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are real people, affiliated with Fractal Antenna
>Systems, Inc. Mr. Rauch is attempted to associate a ficititous character and
>one I am suing with the group. More specifically, he is attempting to get
>everyone to think that these are ALL one person.
>
> Sick.
>
>NC
>
Hey Dr Sicknote,
Have a search on dejacom of the 54,681,783,526,485th message you
posted in rec.radio.amateur.antenna.
"Fractenna a écrit dans le message:
> Why are you writing as if we were several person ? "
What is your point here, one day you tell the group you are one
and only one human being, then you come whining because someone
says 'Phil', 'Chip' and 'Hy' are all one person.
Tell us Nathaniel, 'Hy' stands for Harvey the rabbit, 'Phil' stands
for Philosophy Daemon ( PhD), but who is 'Chip'?
And does NC after your signature stands for "No Comment" ?
Please correct me if I am wrong.
--
Gilbert F6BOM
kk...@my-deja.com
responses.
>
>
> Chip N1IR
>
It is sad to see the holder of a PhD with such poor reading
comprehension. I never addressed Mr. Rauch's activities or postings
only YOUR behavior. Apparently you even embarass yourself with your
nonsense or you would not keep trying to turn the discussion away
from what you have done to what you say Rauch has done.
Let us address the slander, libel(at least that's the way I spell it)
and defaming. You keep calling Mr. Rauch a drunk and infering he
has had some serious legal troubles. Your behavior seems to be
more like what you accuse him of.
Having only met Mr. Rauch once I cannot claim to know his customary
life style but the day I spoke with him he seemed quite sober and
rational to me. Well having wasted enough time on you I have to finish
the lecture I'm giving tomorrow.
Have a wonderful life.
Fractenna
>Let us address the slander, libel(at least that's the way I spell it)
>and defaming. You keep calling Mr. Rauch a drunk and infering he
>has had some serious legal troubles. Your behavior seems to be
>more like what you accuse him of.
>
>Having only met Mr. Rauch once I cannot claim to know his customary
>life style but the day I spoke with him he seemed quite sober and
>rational to me. Well having wasted enough time on you I have to finish
>the lecture I'm giving tomorrow.
>
>Have a wonderful life.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
Thank you for affirming that an indiepndent observer ALSO sees Mr. rauch's
behavior in the same way.
I did, indeed, ask Mr. Rauch if he is alcoholic. I did not SAY Mr. Rauch is
alcoholic. His answer is that he never drinks.
Instead he admitted that his bad behavior here is ascribable to an unfortunate
and deeper issue--ergo his statement "because its fun".
The fact that you did not address Mr. Rauch's behavior is EXACTLY the point I
made: your objective is not to stop some percieved, ongoing , bad behavior, but
a deliberate effort to single out me as looking bad.
Isn't Mr. Rauch doing that already?.
I said that if Mr. Rauch stops this nonsense that I will change nothing. In
other words; I will not defend myself if I am not being attacked. Indeed, in
the last couple of posts--for example on the counterpoise--Mr. Rauch managed
not to insult me (and so on).
For a few moments, it was possible to have a meaningful exchange.
Why not every post?
Please, enough about having a nice life. Life is challenging enough without
such veiled insults.
73,
Chip N1IR
Tom W8JI
>Let us address the slander, libel(at least that's the way I spell it)
>and defaming. You keep calling Mr. Rauch a drunk and infering he
>has had some serious legal troubles. Your behavior seems to be
>more like what you accuse him of.
A little "bird" is whispering fibs off-line just to egg him on. I've
had others convey how a certain west coast ham invents facts, and what
Chip repeats is identical to the stories that surface from time to
time from California.
I'm sure many of us remember how devious kids used to put the "class
idiot" up to all sorts of no good in grade school.
73 Tom
Lumpy
Lumpy
> >Chip: Now that your hairpull with Tom Rauch is apparently at a
> >temporary lull, I would like to see a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna.
Fractenna wrote:
> Sure Rich; it will be up some time in October on the fractenna ham page.
Lumpy writes:
Frac - If you'd shut the hell up on the NG, you'd
have lots more free time and you
could probably post it in September...
I'm having a hard time convincing my wife that
hams are more professional than CB'ers...
Lumpy AB0GD
Fractenna
>had others convey how a certain west coast ham invents facts, and what
>Chip repeats is identical to the stories that surface from time to
>time from California.
>
>I'm sure many of us remember how devious kids used to put the "class
>idiot" up to all sorts of no good in grade school.
>
>73 Tom
>
73
Chip N1IR
Fractenna
>Shut up Chip...
Excuse me?
Chip N1IR
Fractenna
>> >Chip: Now that your hairpull with Tom Rauch is apparently at a
>> >temporary lull, I would like to see a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna.
>
>Fractenna wrote:
>> Sure Rich; it will be up some time in October on the fractenna ham page.
>
>Lumpy writes:
>Frac - If you'd shut the hell up on the NG, you'd
>have lots more free time and you
>could probably post it in September...
>
>I'm having a hard time convincing my wife that
>hams are more professional than CB'ers...
>
Hams are amateurs, by definition. Some of us are also proefessionals in related
fields.
I don't follow your logic: I do not control the web page timing. I have 35
pages of material in the can for the ham/hobbyist page.
You're right about September though: it will be a busy and exciting month!
73,
Chip N1IR
>Lumpy AB0GD
Fractenna
>idiot" up to all sorts of no good in grade school.
>
>73 Tom
You know Tom, for 5 minutes you acted like a civil, rational adult. Now
you're back to invective, this time calling me a "class idiot". Don't you
realize that people just don't want to hear this stuff?
I will continue to defend myself and if you continue by the time we find out
who the Equalizer is, then I will proceed with a lawsuit against you. That is
not a threat; it is a statement of fact and now public knowledge.
If you continue to slander, defame,lie, accuse, and/or libel me I will continue
to defend myself and point out the wrongness of your actions.
If necessary, I will do this daily--until the courts allow an injunction
against your statements.
Your behavior is the deciding issue.
After Sept 1, I will be forced to restrict my comments--when needed-- to a
short period in the evening. But I will continue to defend myself against your
outrageous public behavior.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>Hams are amateurs, by definition. Some of us are also proefessionals in related
>fields.
Yetterday I couldn't spell "proefessional", today I is one.
>You know Tom, for 5 minutes you acted like a civil, rational adult. Now
>you're back to invective, this time calling me a "class idiot".
I should have said "class act".
>I will continue to defend myself and if you continue by the time we find out
>who the Equalizer is, then I will proceed with a lawsuit against you. That is
>not a threat; it is a statement of fact and now public knowledge.
Like Red Roof Inn, the lights are always on in Georgia. The sign at
Milledgeville Physciatric Hospital next to admissions says "Reserved
for Doctors". That's mostly so proefessionals like you can avoid
parking with common folk like amateurs.
73 Tom
Fractenna
>>you're back to invective, this time calling me a "class idiot".
>
>I should have said "class act".
>
Thank you for the compliment.
73,
Chip N1IR
R. L. Measures
frac...@aol.com (Fractenna) wrote:
> >>
> >€ Chip: Now that your hairpull with Tom Rauch is apparently at a
> >temporary lull, I would like to see a drawing of your 30m fractal antenna.
> >--
> >- Rich...
>
> Sure Rich; it will be up some time in October on the fractenna ham page.
>
> 73
> Chip N1IR
€ Thanks, Chip.
--
- Rich... 805.386.3734. www.vecnet.com/measures, remove plus from adr.
Dark Avenger
>>
>>Shut up Chip...
>>--
>>The Very Unofficial Colorado APRS Page
>>http://www.digitalcartography.com
>>
>
>Excuse me?
>
>Chip N1IR
I believe he said "Shut up Chip" I second the motion.
SHUT UP CHIP
Thanks so much
Fractenna
I am repeating this post under the clarity of this thread's title.
If there are those individuals who feel that Tom's position is tenable, I
strongly urge you to rally around him and help him face the music. He has until
9 PM this evening to accept this challenge, or its consequences. he has had
since March to think about it,he need no more time.
Mr. Rauch is a crank--no crank can publicly and visually defend what is not so.
Science cannot tolerate a crank's loud, persistent, harrassing voice hiding
behind a newsgroup. Granted, such an activity is a new phenomenon brought about
by the internet, which cannot articulate, present, and defend. Defined,
visual, public, hand on, and civil scientific debate has historically worked
as a legitimate mechanism.
I have been more than magnanimous in agreeing to debate. And historically--such
as last's year debunking of a hoaxed SETI signal--I used visual information to
reveal the hoax and kill a growing menace. I am well prepared to do this
again, and thus challenge Mr. Rauch.
-------------------------------------------
Tom Rauch said:
>There is no way to debate a technical issue with a person who does not
>offer valid technical information, and reply directly to questions.
>Chip unfortunately falls in that class, it is a standard MO for Voo
>Doo science.
>
>73 Tom
>
>
EXCELLENT!
NOW MR. Rauch has COME CLEAN!
He has called fractal antennas, and my work therein, "pathological science" and
"Voo doo science". He has done this before, but has shied away in recent
months, and been incapable of saying it directly. NOW HE HAS. The edge has been
revealed!
The reason this is KEY, is that it is a standard technique of the crank: call
legitimate work 'junk science', and so on.
And, of course, Mr. Rauch has now gone ON RECORD as stating that he will NOT
debate.
Time to give him incentive to change his mind.
So, I am going to make an extraordinary offer --and you will be reminded that
failure to accept its reasonable terms on every post you harrass me with in the
future:
IF YOU DEBATE ME, as I have initiated the PUBLIC opportunity to show that your
crank claims of junk science are wrong, I WILL RESIGN MY POSITION AT BOSTON
UNIVERSITY if these extraordinary claims of junk science you state for my
fractal antenna work are correct.
If you DO NOT debate, this is a definitive indication that you have no basis
for what cannot have a basis: your (false) accusations. You will offer a public
APOLOGY to me--here on this newsgroup and in hardcopy, stating that your
behavior was inappropriate ; that you have no knowledge of fractal element
technology; that you have never built, modeled, or tested a fractal element,
and that your comments are not predicated on knowledge of the published work in
this field.
According to you, Mr. Rauch,I am a junk scientist. So, here is your opportunity
to show the WORLD this is so.
Of course, you are a crank, who has become fixated on discrediting a real,
legitimate, and growing field of electromagnetics --worse, you have fixated on
destroying one of its pioneers.
Mr. Rauch has 12 hours to accept or decline (9 PM local) the offer to debate,
on the fair and reasonable terms so stated. He has had since March to consider
this. Now he has to make up his mind.
Nathan Cohen, Ph.D.
Tom W8JI
>IF YOU DEBATE ME, as I have initiated the PUBLIC opportunity to show that your
>crank claims of junk science are wrong, I WILL RESIGN MY POSITION AT BOSTON
>UNIVERSITY if these extraordinary claims of junk science you state for my
>fractal antenna work are correct.
....and who will determine the outcome? You? A popular vote by the
group posting from your communal keyboard?
The word I used was pathological science. Pathological science, or voo
doo science, can not be debated if no one can even explain what it is.
If you clearly explain what your theory is, then we will see if there
is anything to debate. If your theory is fractals have some special
electromagnetic properties, describe whart they are.
If you can't or won't define what your claim is, no one can debate
you.
>Mr. Rauch has 12 hours to accept or decline (9 PM local) the offer to debate,
>on the fair and reasonable terms so stated. He has had since March to consider
>this. Now he has to make up his mind.
How bizzare! You seem to feel your whole life hinges on me and my
approval for your odd professional fixations and behavior, and you are
even so self-enamored you set a "deadline" for my approval!
Very odd behavior Nate. Control freakish!
73 Tom