The Biden Administration is winging it about electrification...

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:01:33 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 12:03:41 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 4:57:48 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 6:07:57 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:50:49 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 11:11:24 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 3:36:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, October 11, 2022 at 10:48:01 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 4:02:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, October 9, 2022 at 2:40:11 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Sunday, October 9, 2022 at 3:58:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, October 8, 2022 at 8:31:16 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
GnatTurd <Maggo...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:ae93bb77-acf9-4802-8bfd-1c4e13...@googlegroups.com:

snip
AGAIN, you DON\'T produce the non-existent plan, but come up with EXCUSES for its absence.

But when I do produce the plan, or at least a link to it, you declare it a non -plan.

Bill, PRODUCE IT or SHUT UP!

https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize

You don\'t like it, because it is a Democrat plan, but declaring it a \"non-plan\" is mere childishness.


Hey Bozo, you have referenced this \"plan\" before - didn\'t you even bother to read it? Well, here is the guts of it:
\"Deploying more than $20 billion in federal financing tools\"
This about ONE PERCENT of what is needed to meet the goals of the plan, which is a SIXTY PERCENT expansion of the grid.

That implies that you have access to a costed plan, to which you have never offered a link. If you did, we\'d find out that you\'d totally misunderstood what you thought that you were reading.

The US grid expanded at about 5% per year from 1950 to about 2000, when it stopped expanding. This didn\'t cripple the US economy.The 60% expansion you are talking about is over seven years (if I remember rightly) which is 7% per year, which isn\'t going to cripple it either.

> I have REPEATEDLY asked you what ONE MILE of transmission line costs, and you keep on making excuses why you CAN\'T ANSWER this simple question.

Only an idiot like you would think that it was a simple question. You haven\'t told us how much current the link would have to carry, and at what voltage.

Lots of lower voltage links carry alternating current, while links carrying more power carry direct current at 500kV.

If you wanted to shift huge amounts of power you might think about using high-temperature super-conductors immersed in liquid hydrogen.

If you can\'t ask a sensible question, you can\'t expect to get an answer. The problem that you couldn\'t understand the answer if you did get one.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <ade5bf62-5a02-4ef1-bb9e-ebffad784f3bn@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com says...

A lot of these state universities are diploma mills. The students, if you can call them that, don\'t get a very good education. If they\'re not morons when they enroll, they\'re fully moron-ized by the time they graduate. Most of the teaching staff, being state employed civil servants, aren\'t very good either.
This is why you see horrendous statistics like 70% of graduate EEs are no longer working in the profession after five years. Bellhops when they\'re younger, parking lot attendants when they\'re older.

That is the way of one local technical school. A friend was a part time
instructor there. He was teaching the second course of an electrical
program for adults already working in the business for companies. They
had not learned anything in the first part under another instructor and
he failed about half the class. He was told that he was no longer
needed to do any more teaching there.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 1:14:44 PM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:

In article <ade5bf62-5a02-4ef1...@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com says...

A lot of these state universities are diploma mills. The students, if you can call them that, don\'t get a very good education. If they\'re not morons when they enroll, they\'re fully moron-ized by the time they graduate. Most of the teaching staff, being state employed civil servants, aren\'t very good either.
This is why you see horrendous statistics like 70% of graduate EEs are no longer working in the profession after five years. Bellhops when they\'re younger, parking lot attendants when they\'re older.


That is the way of one local technical school. A friend was a part time
instructor there. He was teaching the second course of an electrical
program for adults already working in the business for companies. They
had not learned anything in the first part under another instructor and
he failed about half the class. He was told that he was no longer
needed to do any more teaching there.

They outright tell the adjuncts in many cases \"If the students don\'t like you, we don\'t like you.\"

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 10:00:24 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 4:29:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

snip

I didn\'t \"question\" you credentials. I did point out that you hadn\'t said what degree you had, or where you\'d got it.

The fraud here is you. You have now claimed two unremarkable academic institutions, but there\'s still no way that we could verify your claim.

You remain an anonymous troll with cognitive defects.

Hey Bozo, you could verify the degrees if it suited your purpose, but it doesn\'t and you won\'t.

How? You\'d have to give us a name we could search on to verify that somebody with that name had that degree. Verifying that you were the person with that name, who had got that degree is rather more difficult.

Remarkability is some touchy-feely concept that has NOTHING to do with the quality of the education and MUCH MORE to do with the \"good old boys\" network.

There are a bunch of university rankings. I agree that they don\'t mean all that much, but they do have quite a bit to do with the quality of education. Oregon State University is never going to score all that high - between 301 and 350 on the world university rankings.

Washington State University is even less impressive in the 350 to 401range.

Your claiming to have been trained there won\'t help their rankings.

University rankings are like a beauty contest - all superficial and no substance.

You\'ve got to be pretty good-looking to win a beauty contest. There is some substance there.

And, WHAT is it that they say about beauty?

It is supposed to be only skin-deep, which isn\'t strictly true - underlying bone structure makes a lot of difference.

Do you REALLY think that E-M fields are ANY different at MIT than at OSU? REALLY??

That isn\'t the point. MIT and Cambridge can use Horowitz and Hill\'s \"The Art of Electronics\" as an undergraduate electronics text.

I have a copy of that and I NEVER attended either school! ANYBODY can get copies of ANY textbook, you idiot!

But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that.

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!
But you\'ve never shown any sign of knowing anything about electronics. You might have waved it in front of the students, but teaching them stuff from it is a bit more demanding.

Sorry Bozo, but ad hominem attacks are right down your alley. You, of course, have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA about my courses or what was taught. You are only BLOWING SMOKE and are a DESPICABLE HUMAN BEING for doing so.

Places that can\'t be as picky about the undergraduates they let in have to pick easier and less comprehensive text books.

HA HA HA HA! You should check out \"diversity admissions\" at these schools!

So should you. They do seem to do unexpectedly well.

Oh, really? Do you have actual EVIDENCE of that, or are you BLOWING SMOKE (I vote for the later)?
Of course you do. You can\'t find any evidence that they don\'t, and if I found confirming evidence you\'d deny it.

No, I said YOU, Bozo, not me. Your senility is catching up to you. Again, you FAIL to present ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, which means that you DON\'T HAVE ANY, as usual.

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!

It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago.

Uncritically swallowing right-wing propaganda isn\'t getting any kind of education. If you had got any kind of education you\'d be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, and you obviously can\'t.

Well, you have been swallowing LEFT-WING propaganda your whole life! In any case, it has NOTHING to do with engineering, you idiot.

All accredited schools do have to meet a minimum standard. Most surpass it. Some, like MIT and Harvard and the University of Cambridge, surpass it by quite a lot.

Again, what EVIDENCE do you have?
None that you would take seriously. It exists but you could be relied on to ignore it.
When I did first year physics at Melbourne I got stuck in the Physics 1B classes that didn\'t use calculus - I\'d got my secondary education in Tasmania and the clowns that streamed the students didn\'t realise that I\'d got calculus at secondary school.

I guess you are saying that Australian colleges are substandard.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022/world-ranking.

is Engllsh so it puts Oxford first, but Caltech and Harvard are second, Standford is 4th. MIT and Cambridge are equal 5th. The University of Melbourne in Australia is in there at 33. Not exactly sub-standard.

If you hadn\'t realized it yet, these rankings are NOTHING MORE than a POPULARITY CONTEST.
There is certainly an element of that in the rankings, but popularity has consequences. If bright undergraduate want to go to high prestige universities, it makes the business of teaching and getting taught there a whole lot more interesting and satisfying.

You are just caught up in trying to justify your FAILED ARGUMENT. George W. Bush is a graduate of BOTH Yale and Harvard: now you tell me what a BRILLIANT president he was!

snip>> > > > The electromagnetic field theory that gets taught at MIT and Ohio State may rest on the same theoretical basis, but the MIT students will be asked to grasp more of it.

snipped more of Gnatguy being unconvinced
You are much too dim to know what\'s going on here.

No, I know EXACTLY what\'s going on here - it is YOU that are CLUELESS!

Gnatguy thinks this a lot. He is mostly wrong - in fact I can\'t think of case when he has been right, but it\'s not a question I take all that seriously.

Well, Bozo, you CAN\'T THINK, so no surprise there!
Which is Gnatguy expressing his disappointment that I don\'t fall for the fatuous nonsense that he advances here.

No, you REPEATEDLY demonstrate that you don\'t think things thru and just make ad hominem arguments (look up \"ad hominem\"). You must have been a grade school bully.

Take Thomas Edison for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison#Early_life):

\"It is known that early in his career he enrolled in a chemistry course at The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art to support his work on a new telegraphy system with Charles Batchelor. This appears to have been his only enrollment in courses at an institution of higher learning.\"

Edison was famously an autodidact. I\'m a senior member of the IEEE without having done any courses in electronics, so I might be taken as another, but I did get taught to read textbooks for myself when Edision had to work that out on his own.

I am a senior member of the IEEE as well, except I have the education to back it up. You, on the other hand, can\'t even SPELL.
Except that as an anonymous troll you can\'t back up your claim. You don\'t post to electronic threads, so the claim is implausible.

You KNOW who I am and can verify those IF YOU WISH!

You aren\'t Edison. He did get a lot of patents. I\'ve only got my name on three. My father and a couple of my friends have got their names on a 25-odd each, so I only get to boast around people who haven\'t got any.

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!
I\'ve cited them here. You can\'t, because you are an anonymous troll

Sorry, but, again, YOU can verify that IF YOU WISH.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 6:03:37 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 10:00:24 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 4:29:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

snip

I didn\'t \"question\" you credentials. I did point out that you hadn\'t said what degree you had, or where you\'d got it.

The fraud here is you. You have now claimed two unremarkable academic institutions, but there\'s still no way that we could verify your claim.

You remain an anonymous troll with cognitive defects.

Hey Bozo, you could verify the degrees if it suited your purpose, but it doesn\'t and you won\'t.

How? You\'d have to give us a name we could search on to verify that somebody with that name had that degree. Verifying that you were the person with that name, who had got that degree is rather more difficult.

Remarkability is some touchy-feely concept that has NOTHING to do with the quality of the education and MUCH MORE to do with the \"good old boys\" network.

There are a bunch of university rankings. I agree that they don\'t mean all that much, but they do have quite a bit to do with the quality of education. Oregon State University is never going to score all that high - between 301 and 350 on the world university rankings.

Washington State University is even less impressive in the 350 to 401range.

Your claiming to have been trained there won\'t help their rankings.

University rankings are like a beauty contest - all superficial and no substance.

You\'ve got to be pretty good-looking to win a beauty contest. There is some substance there.

And, WHAT is it that they say about beauty?

It is supposed to be only skin-deep, which isn\'t strictly true - underlying bone structure makes a lot of difference.

Do you REALLY think that E-M fields are ANY different at MIT than at OSU? REALLY??

That isn\'t the point. MIT and Cambridge can use Horowitz and Hill\'s \"The Art of Electronics\" as an undergraduate electronics text.

I have a copy of that and I NEVER attended either school! ANYBODY can get copies of ANY textbook, you idiot!

But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that.

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!

But you\'ve never shown any sign of knowing anything about electronics. You might have waved it in front of the students, but teaching them stuff from it is a bit more demanding.

Sorry, but ad hominem attacks are right down your alley. You, of course, have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA about my courses or what was taught.

How could I. You haven\'t told us a thing about it. Your performance here does suggest that it would have been really badly taught, and you\'ve never posted a thing about electronics after infesting an electronics user group for more than a year, so a little scepticism is in order. You are a despicable human being but pointing the consequences of your obvious defects isn\'t any kind of ad hominem attack

> You are only BLOWING SMOKE and are a DESPICABLE HUMAN BEING for doing so..

You do like to think you can get away with that kind of claim - people who actually are despicable human beings, as you seem to be, go in for them a lot.

Places that can\'t be as picky about the undergraduates they let in have to pick easier and less comprehensive text books.

HA HA HA HA! You should check out \"diversity admissions\" at these schools!

So should you. They do seem to do unexpectedly well.

Oh, really? Do you have actual EVIDENCE of that, or are you BLOWING SMOKE (I vote for the later)?

Of course you do. You can\'t find any evidence that they don\'t, and if I found confirming evidence you\'d deny it.

No, I said YOU, not me. Your senility is catching up to you. Again, you FAIL to present ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, which means that you DON\'T HAVE ANY, as usual.

Unlike you. I do have evidence. I\'m just not going to waste the time marshalling it for your benefit.

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!

It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago.

Uncritically swallowing right-wing propaganda isn\'t getting any kind of education. If you had got any kind of education you\'d be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, and you obviously can\'t.

Well, you have been swallowing LEFT-WING propaganda your whole life! In any case, it has NOTHING to do with engineering, you idiot.

My take on left wing political theory isn\'t uncritical, but I wouldn\'t waste my time trying to discuss it with you.

All accredited schools do have to meet a minimum standard. Most surpass it. Some, like MIT and Harvard and the University of Cambridge, surpass it by quite a lot.

Again, what EVIDENCE do you have?

None that you would take seriously. It exists but you could be relied on to ignore it.

When I did first year physics at Melbourne I got stuck in the Physics 1B classes that didn\'t use calculus - I\'d got my secondary education in Tasmania and the clowns that streamed the students didn\'t realise that I\'d got calculus at secondary school.

I guess you are saying that Australian colleges are substandard.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022/world-ranking.

is Engllsh so it puts Oxford first, but Caltech and Harvard are second, Standford is 4th. MIT and Cambridge are equal 5th. The University of Melbourne in Australia is in there at 33. Not exactly sub-standard.

If you hadn\'t realized it yet, these rankings are NOTHING MORE than a POPULARITY CONTEST.
There is certainly an element of that in the rankings, but popularity has consequences. If bright undergraduate want to go to high prestige universities, it makes the business of teaching and getting taught there a whole lot more interesting and satisfying.

You are just caught up in trying to justify your FAILED ARGUMENT. George W. Bush is a graduate of BOTH Yale and Harvard: now you tell me what a BRILLIANT president he was!

George W. Bush got into Yale and Harvard in part because his grandfather had a lot of oil money. His father went there too. He also did adequately on his admission tests. The drinking that fried his brain happened later.

snip>> > > > The electromagnetic field theory that gets taught at MIT and Ohio State may rest on the same theoretical basis, but the MIT students will be asked to grasp more of it.

snipped more of Gnatguy being unconvinced

You are much too dim to know what\'s going on here.

No, I know EXACTLY what\'s going on here - it is YOU that are CLUELESS!

Gnatguy thinks this a lot. He is mostly wrong - in fact I can\'t think of case when he has been right, but it\'s not a question I take all that seriously.

Well, Bozo, you CAN\'T THINK, so no surprise there!

Which is Gnatguy expressing his disappointment that I don\'t fall for the fatuous nonsense that he advances here.

No, you REPEATEDLY demonstrate that you don\'t think things thru and just make ad hominem arguments (look up \"ad hominem\"). You must have been a grade school bully.

Not a claim any of the students I went to school with would find credible.

Take Thomas Edison for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison#Early_life):

\"It is known that early in his career he enrolled in a chemistry course at The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art to support his work on a new telegraphy system with Charles Batchelor. This appears to have been his only enrollment in courses at an institution of higher learning.\"

Edison was famously an autodidact. I\'m a senior member of the IEEE without having done any courses in electronics, so I might be taken as another, but I did get taught to read textbooks for myself when Edision had to work that out on his own.

I am a senior member of the IEEE as well, except I have the education to back it up. You, on the other hand, can\'t even SPELL.

Except that as an anonymous troll you can\'t back up your claim. You don\'t post to electronic threads, so the claim is implausible.

You KNOW who I am and can verify those IF YOU WISH!

I want to know as little about you as possible.

You aren\'t Edison. He did get a lot of patents. I\'ve only got my name on three. My father and a couple of my friends have got their names on a 25-odd each, so I only get to boast around people who haven\'t got any.

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!
I\'ve cited them here. You can\'t, because you are an anonymous troll.

Sorry, but, again, YOU can verify that IF YOU WISH.

Why would I want to? I\'m perfectly happy to accept you as the anonymous half-wit you present yourself as here. You may have hidden depths but they are likely to be a foul and stagnant as the surface you present here. Glider pilot indeed. Sewage skimmer is more the mark.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

snip

I didn\'t \"question\" you credentials. I did point out that you hadn\'t said what degree you had, or where you\'d got it.

The fraud here is you. You have now claimed two unremarkable academic institutions, but there\'s still no way that we could verify your claim.

You remain an anonymous troll with cognitive defects.

Hey Bozo, you could verify the degrees if it suited your purpose, but it doesn\'t and you won\'t.

How? You\'d have to give us a name we could search on to verify that somebody with that name had that degree. Verifying that you were the person with that name, who had got that degree is rather more difficult.

Remarkability is some touchy-feely concept that has NOTHING to do with the quality of the education and MUCH MORE to do with the \"good old boys\" network.

There are a bunch of university rankings. I agree that they don\'t mean all that much, but they do have quite a bit to do with the quality of education. Oregon State University is never going to score all that high - between 301 and 350 on the world university rankings.

Washington State University is even less impressive in the 350 to 401range.

Your claiming to have been trained there won\'t help their rankings.

University rankings are like a beauty contest - all superficial and no substance.

You\'ve got to be pretty good-looking to win a beauty contest. There is some substance there.

And, WHAT is it that they say about beauty?
It is supposed to be only skin-deep, which isn\'t strictly true - underlying bone structure makes a lot of difference.
Do you REALLY think that E-M fields are ANY different at MIT than at OSU? REALLY??

That isn\'t the point. MIT and Cambridge can use Horowitz and Hill\'s \"The Art of Electronics\" as an undergraduate electronics text.

I have a copy of that and I NEVER attended either school! ANYBODY can get copies of ANY textbook, you idiot!
But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that..

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!

Places that can\'t be as picky about the undergraduates they let in have to pick easier and less comprehensive text books.

HA HA HA HA! You should check out \"diversity admissions\" at these schools!
So should you. They do seem to do unexpectedly well.

Oh, really? Do you have actual EVIDENCE of that, or are you BLOWING SMOKE (I vote for the later)?

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!
It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago, Bozo.

All accredited schools do have to meet a minimum standard. Most surpass it. Some, like MIT and Harvard and the University of Cambridge, surpass it by quite a lot.

Again, what EVIDENCE do you have?

When I did first year physics at Melbourne I got stuck in the Physics 1B classes that didn\'t use calculus - I\'d got my secondary education in Tasmania and the clowns that streamed the students didn\'t realise that I\'d got calculus at secondary school.

I guess you are saying that Australian colleges are substandard.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022/world-ranking

If you hadn\'t realized it yet, these rankings are NOTHING MORE than a POPULARITY CONTEST.

is Engllsh so it puts Oxford first, but Caltech and Harvard are second, Standford is 4th. MIT and Cambridge are equal 5th. The University of Melbourne in Australia is in there at 33. Not exactly sub-standard.

Your spelling SUCKS! Are you SURE you graduated???

Your guesses are remarkably stupid.

More intelligent than yours, by A LOT!

The electromagnetic field theory that gets taught at MIT and Ohio State may rest on the same theoretical basis, but the MIT students will be asked to grasp more of it.

You are just BLOWING SMOKE and you KNOW IT!

You do seem to want to think so.

I KNOW IT!

You are much too dim to know what\'s going on here.

No, I know EXACTLY what\'s going on here - it is YOU that are CLUELESS!
Gnatguy thinks this a lot. He is mostly wrong - in fact I can\'t think of case when he has been right, but it\'s not a question I take all that seriously.

Well, Bozo, you CAN\'T THINK, so no surprise there!

Take Thomas Edison for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison#Early_life):

\"It is known that early in his career he enrolled in a chemistry course at The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art to support his work on a new telegraphy system with Charles Batchelor. This appears to have been his only enrollment in courses at an institution of higher learning.\"
Edison was famously an autodidact. I\'m a senior member of the IEEE without having done any courses in electronics, so I might be taken as another, but I did get taught to read textbooks for myself when Edision had to work that out on his own.

I am a senior member of the IEEE as well, except I have the education to back it up. You, on the other hand, can\'t even SPELL.

You aren\'t Edison. He did get a lot of patents. I\'ve only got my name on three. My father and a couple of my friends have got their names on a 25-odd each, so I only get to boast around people who haven\'t got any.

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 4:29:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

snip

I didn\'t \"question\" you credentials. I did point out that you hadn\'t said what degree you had, or where you\'d got it.

The fraud here is you. You have now claimed two unremarkable academic institutions, but there\'s still no way that we could verify your claim.

You remain an anonymous troll with cognitive defects.

Hey Bozo, you could verify the degrees if it suited your purpose, but it doesn\'t and you won\'t.

How? You\'d have to give us a name we could search on to verify that somebody with that name had that degree. Verifying that you were the person with that name, who had got that degree is rather more difficult.

Remarkability is some touchy-feely concept that has NOTHING to do with the quality of the education and MUCH MORE to do with the \"good old boys\" network.

There are a bunch of university rankings. I agree that they don\'t mean all that much, but they do have quite a bit to do with the quality of education. Oregon State University is never going to score all that high - between 301 and 350 on the world university rankings.

Washington State University is even less impressive in the 350 to 401range.

Your claiming to have been trained there won\'t help their rankings.

University rankings are like a beauty contest - all superficial and no substance.

You\'ve got to be pretty good-looking to win a beauty contest. There is some substance there.

And, WHAT is it that they say about beauty?

It is supposed to be only skin-deep, which isn\'t strictly true - underlying bone structure makes a lot of difference.

Do you REALLY think that E-M fields are ANY different at MIT than at OSU? REALLY??

That isn\'t the point. MIT and Cambridge can use Horowitz and Hill\'s \"The Art of Electronics\" as an undergraduate electronics text.

I have a copy of that and I NEVER attended either school! ANYBODY can get copies of ANY textbook, you idiot!

But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that.

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!

But you\'ve never shown any sign of knowing anything about electronics. You might have waved it in front of the students, but teaching them stuff from it is a bit more demanding.

Places that can\'t be as picky about the undergraduates they let in have to pick easier and less comprehensive text books.

HA HA HA HA! You should check out \"diversity admissions\" at these schools!

So should you. They do seem to do unexpectedly well.

Oh, really? Do you have actual EVIDENCE of that, or are you BLOWING SMOKE (I vote for the later)?

Of course you do. You can\'t find any evidence that they don\'t, and if I found confirming evidence you\'d deny it.

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard.. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!

It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago.

Uncritically swallowing right-wing propaganda isn\'t getting any kind of education. If you had got any kind of education you\'d be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, and you obviously can\'t.

All accredited schools do have to meet a minimum standard. Most surpass it. Some, like MIT and Harvard and the University of Cambridge, surpass it by quite a lot.

Again, what EVIDENCE do you have?

None that you would take seriously. It exists but you could be relied on to ignore it.

When I did first year physics at Melbourne I got stuck in the Physics 1B classes that didn\'t use calculus - I\'d got my secondary education in Tasmania and the clowns that streamed the students didn\'t realise that I\'d got calculus at secondary school.

I guess you are saying that Australian colleges are substandard.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022/world-ranking.

is Engllsh so it puts Oxford first, but Caltech and Harvard are second, Standford is 4th. MIT and Cambridge are equal 5th. The University of Melbourne in Australia is in there at 33. Not exactly sub-standard.

If you hadn\'t realized it yet, these rankings are NOTHING MORE than a POPULARITY CONTEST.

There is certainly an element of that in the rankings, but popularity has consequences. If bright undergraduate want to go to high prestige universities, it makes the business of teaching and getting taught there a whole lot more interesting and satisfying.

<snip>> > > > The electromagnetic field theory that gets taught at MIT and Ohio State may rest on the same theoretical basis, but the MIT students will be asked to grasp more of it.

<snipped more of Gnatguy being unconvinced>

You are much too dim to know what\'s going on here.

No, I know EXACTLY what\'s going on here - it is YOU that are CLUELESS!

Gnatguy thinks this a lot. He is mostly wrong - in fact I can\'t think of case when he has been right, but it\'s not a question I take all that seriously.

Well, Bozo, you CAN\'T THINK, so no surprise there!

Which is Gnatguy expressing his disappointment that I don\'t fall for the fatuous nonsense that he advances here.

Take Thomas Edison for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison#Early_life):

\"It is known that early in his career he enrolled in a chemistry course at The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art to support his work on a new telegraphy system with Charles Batchelor. This appears to have been his only enrollment in courses at an institution of higher learning.\"

Edison was famously an autodidact. I\'m a senior member of the IEEE without having done any courses in electronics, so I might be taken as another, but I did get taught to read textbooks for myself when Edision had to work that out on his own.

I am a senior member of the IEEE as well, except I have the education to back it up. You, on the other hand, can\'t even SPELL.

Except that as an anonymous troll you can\'t back up your claim. You don\'t post to electronic threads, so the claim is implausible.

You aren\'t Edison. He did get a lot of patents. I\'ve only got my name on three. My father and a couple of my friends have got their names on a 25-odd each, so I only get to boast around people who haven\'t got any.

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!

I\'ve cited them here. You can\'t, because you are an anonymous troll

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 1:04:52 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 6:03:37 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 10:00:24 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 4:29:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee..org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

snip

I didn\'t \"question\" you credentials. I did point out that you hadn\'t said what degree you had, or where you\'d got it.

The fraud here is you. You have now claimed two unremarkable academic institutions, but there\'s still no way that we could verify your claim.

You remain an anonymous troll with cognitive defects.

Hey Bozo, you could verify the degrees if it suited your purpose, but it doesn\'t and you won\'t.

How? You\'d have to give us a name we could search on to verify that somebody with that name had that degree. Verifying that you were the person with that name, who had got that degree is rather more difficult.

Remarkability is some touchy-feely concept that has NOTHING to do with the quality of the education and MUCH MORE to do with the \"good old boys\" network.

There are a bunch of university rankings. I agree that they don\'t mean all that much, but they do have quite a bit to do with the quality of education. Oregon State University is never going to score all that high - between 301 and 350 on the world university rankings.

Washington State University is even less impressive in the 350 to 401range.

Your claiming to have been trained there won\'t help their rankings.

University rankings are like a beauty contest - all superficial and no substance.

You\'ve got to be pretty good-looking to win a beauty contest. There is some substance there.

And, WHAT is it that they say about beauty?

It is supposed to be only skin-deep, which isn\'t strictly true - underlying bone structure makes a lot of difference.

Do you REALLY think that E-M fields are ANY different at MIT than at OSU? REALLY??

That isn\'t the point. MIT and Cambridge can use Horowitz and Hill\'s \"The Art of Electronics\" as an undergraduate electronics text.

I have a copy of that and I NEVER attended either school! ANYBODY can get copies of ANY textbook, you idiot!

But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that.

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!

But you\'ve never shown any sign of knowing anything about electronics.. You might have waved it in front of the students, but teaching them stuff from it is a bit more demanding.

Sorry, but ad hominem attacks are right down your alley. You, of course, have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA about my courses or what was taught.

How could I. You haven\'t told us a thing about it. Your performance here does suggest that it would have been really badly taught, and you\'ve never posted a thing about electronics after infesting an electronics user group for more than a year, so a little scepticism is in order. You are a despicable human being but pointing the consequences of your obvious defects isn\'t any kind of ad hominem attack

At least you ADMIT that you have NO IDEA - probably the most HONEST thing you have ever said.

You are only BLOWING SMOKE and are a DESPICABLE HUMAN BEING for doing so.
You do like to think you can get away with that kind of claim - people who actually are despicable human beings, as you seem to be, go in for them a lot.

No, YOU have done things like BALD FACED LYING about me and others, so it is ON YOU!

Places that can\'t be as picky about the undergraduates they let in have to pick easier and less comprehensive text books.

HA HA HA HA! You should check out \"diversity admissions\" at these schools!

So should you. They do seem to do unexpectedly well.

Oh, really? Do you have actual EVIDENCE of that, or are you BLOWING SMOKE (I vote for the later)?

Of course you do. You can\'t find any evidence that they don\'t, and if I found confirming evidence you\'d deny it.

No, I said YOU, not me. Your senility is catching up to you. Again, you FAIL to present ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, which means that you DON\'T HAVE ANY, as usual.

Unlike you. I do have evidence. I\'m just not going to waste the time marshalling it for your benefit.

This is just MORE of your despicable behavior. You CLAIM to have \"evidence,\" but then REFUSE to produce it because you DON\'T HAVE IT!

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!

It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago.

Uncritically swallowing right-wing propaganda isn\'t getting any kind of education. If you had got any kind of education you\'d be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, and you obviously can\'t.

Well, you have been swallowing LEFT-WING propaganda your whole life! In any case, it has NOTHING to do with engineering, you idiot.
My take on left wing political theory isn\'t uncritical, but I wouldn\'t waste my time trying to discuss it with you.

Again, because you DON\'T have any \"theory,\" just pure BULLSHIT.

All accredited schools do have to meet a minimum standard. Most surpass it. Some, like MIT and Harvard and the University of Cambridge, surpass it by quite a lot.

Again, what EVIDENCE do you have?

None that you would take seriously. It exists but you could be relied on to ignore it.

When I did first year physics at Melbourne I got stuck in the Physics 1B classes that didn\'t use calculus - I\'d got my secondary education in Tasmania and the clowns that streamed the students didn\'t realise that I\'d got calculus at secondary school.

I guess you are saying that Australian colleges are substandard..
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022/world-ranking.

is Engllsh so it puts Oxford first, but Caltech and Harvard are second, Standford is 4th. MIT and Cambridge are equal 5th. The University of Melbourne in Australia is in there at 33. Not exactly sub-standard.

If you hadn\'t realized it yet, these rankings are NOTHING MORE than a POPULARITY CONTEST.
There is certainly an element of that in the rankings, but popularity has consequences. If bright undergraduate want to go to high prestige universities, it makes the business of teaching and getting taught there a whole lot more interesting and satisfying.

You are just caught up in trying to justify your FAILED ARGUMENT. George W. Bush is a graduate of BOTH Yale and Harvard: now you tell me what a BRILLIANT president he was!
George W. Bush got into Yale and Harvard in part because his grandfather had a lot of oil money. His father went there too. He also did adequately on his admission tests. The drinking that fried his brain happened later.

This TOTALLY refutes your theory about Yale graduates, but you WON\'T ADMIT IT.

snip>> > > > The electromagnetic field theory that gets taught at MIT and Ohio State may rest on the same theoretical basis, but the MIT students will be asked to grasp more of it.

snipped more of Gnatguy being unconvinced

You are much too dim to know what\'s going on here.

No, I know EXACTLY what\'s going on here - it is YOU that are CLUELESS!

Gnatguy thinks this a lot. He is mostly wrong - in fact I can\'t think of case when he has been right, but it\'s not a question I take all that seriously.

Well, Bozo, you CAN\'T THINK, so no surprise there!

Which is Gnatguy expressing his disappointment that I don\'t fall for the fatuous nonsense that he advances here.

No, you REPEATEDLY demonstrate that you don\'t think things thru and just make ad hominem arguments (look up \"ad hominem\"). You must have been a grade school bully.
Not a claim any of the students I went to school with would find credible..

WHO knows WHO you went to school with - just another FATUOUS argument.

Take Thomas Edison for example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison#Early_life):

\"It is known that early in his career he enrolled in a chemistry course at The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art to support his work on a new telegraphy system with Charles Batchelor. This appears to have been his only enrollment in courses at an institution of higher learning.\"

Edison was famously an autodidact. I\'m a senior member of the IEEE without having done any courses in electronics, so I might be taken as another, but I did get taught to read textbooks for myself when Edision had to work that out on his own.

I am a senior member of the IEEE as well, except I have the education to back it up. You, on the other hand, can\'t even SPELL.

Except that as an anonymous troll you can\'t back up your claim. You don\'t post to electronic threads, so the claim is implausible.

You KNOW who I am and can verify those IF YOU WISH!
I want to know as little about you as possible.

Hardly, Bozo - you know EXACTLY who I am and took pride in revealing it, so STOP with the DUMMY defense.

You aren\'t Edison. He did get a lot of patents. I\'ve only got my name on three. My father and a couple of my friends have got their names on a 25-odd each, so I only get to boast around people who haven\'t got any.

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!
I\'ve cited them here. You can\'t, because you are an anonymous troll.

Sorry, but, again, YOU can verify that IF YOU WISH.
Why would I want to? I\'m perfectly happy to accept you as the anonymous half-wit you present yourself as here. You may have hidden depths but they are likely to be a foul and stagnant as the surface you present here. Glider pilot indeed. Sewage skimmer is more the mark.

Why? Because it would prove exactly HOW WRONG you are.

--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:51:02 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 1:04:52 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 6:03:37 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 10:00:24 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2022 at 4:29:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:37:32 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:11:36 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:21:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:58:53 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 1:39:49 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 8:07:41 PM UTC-7, bill.....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:00:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 6:11:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:15:48 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 10:03:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 12:26:55 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 8:21:58 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:02:43 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, October 19, 2022 at 5:26:58 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:8ee03a9c-e8a5-47f4...@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 7:25:47 PM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote in news:8ed5ecb9-da8b-4ca0...@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:52:16 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:09:25 AM UTC-7, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e7b88338-8da2-4a25...@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 9:36:08 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:

<snip>

But using it as a textbook in course puts demands on the students and the teacher. You won\'t have understood any of it, so you won\'t know about that.

HA HA HA HA! Hey Bozo, I used that textbook in a course that I TAUGHT!!!!

But you\'ve never shown any sign of knowing anything about electronics. You might have waved it in front of the students, but teaching them stuff from it is a bit more demanding.

Sorry, but ad hominem attacks are right down your alley. You, of course, have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA about my courses or what was taught.

How could I. You haven\'t told us a thing about it. Your performance here does suggest that it would have been really badly taught, and you\'ve never posted a thing about electronics after infesting an electronics user group for more than a year, so a little scepticism is in order. You are a despicable human being but pointing out the consequences of your obvious defects isn\'t any kind of ad hominem attack.

At least you ADMIT that you have NO IDEA - probably the most HONEST thing you have ever said.

Sewage Skimmer tries to twist my point - that he hasn\'t told us anything at all about this probably imaginary electronics course - into some kind of admission.

<snip>

Unlike you. I do have evidence. I\'m just not going to waste the time marshaling it for your benefit.

This is just MORE of your despicable behavior. You CLAIM to have \"evidence,\" but then REFUSE to produce it because you DON\'T HAVE IT!

Sewage Skimmer thinks that because he\'d like me not to have the evidence he\'d ignore if I did produce it, he can then claim that I haven\'t got it.

The bottom line is ALL accredited schools have to teach to a standard. I can say that my REAL education started AFTER I graduated!

It doesn\'t seem to have started yet, so that\'s a trivial claim.

It started DECADES ago.

Uncritically swallowing right-wing propaganda isn\'t getting any kind of education. If you had got any kind of education you\'d be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, and you obviously can\'t.

Well, you have been swallowing LEFT-WING propaganda your whole life! In any case, it has NOTHING to do with engineering, you idiot.

Asserting that I \"uncritically swallow left-wing propaganda\" is mere slander. Since Sewage Skimmer seem to think that anything not published as Republican election propaganda is left-wing propaganda, it does have to be a fairly contentless assertion.

My take on left wing political theory isn\'t uncritical, but I wouldn\'t waste my time trying to discuss it with you.

Again, because you DON\'T have any \"theory,\" just pure BULLSHIT.

If it\'s not Sewage Skimmer\'s preferred lying political propaganda, he disapproves of it. He can\'t understand any of it but he knows what he likes.

<snip>

Which is Gnatguy expressing his disappointment that I don\'t fall for the fatuous nonsense that he advances here.

No, you REPEATEDLY demonstrate that you don\'t think things thru and just make ad hominem arguments (look up \"ad hominem\"). You must have been a grade school bully.

Not a claim any of the students I went to school with would find credible.

WHO knows WHO you went to school with - just another FATUOUS argument.

It\'s a matter of record - I\'m not an anonymous troll. From 1956 to 1959 I went to Scotch College, Launceston - it still exists.

<snip>

I also have a patent, but so what? Anybody can get a patent - you PROVE IT!

I\'ve cited them here. You can\'t, because you are an anonymous troll..

Sorry, but, again, YOU can verify that IF YOU WISH.

Why would I want to? I\'m perfectly happy to accept you as the anonymous half-wit you present yourself as here. You may have hidden depths but they are likely to be a foul and stagnant as the surface you present here. Glider pilot indeed. Sewage skimmer is more the mark.

Why? Because it would prove exactly HOW WRONG you are.

About what? Your idiocy is obvious and undeniable -which doesn\'t stop you from trying to deny it, but you are an idiot.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney