<< >If so, let me again state that my only interest is in the alleged LDE's
>recently noted by EME folks. My interest in LDE's was brief; led to a 1978
>publication; and left me with the general sense that documentation of VHF
>UHF LDE's was not credible from hams.
Documentation is credible from anyone applying rigourous and repeatable
scientific method. It is only not credible from hams if remains
anecdotal - as it would be even from a scientist specialising int he
field. I know this is obvious, but... >>
Yes; of course its obvious. But keep in mind OZ9CR's 1296 MHz EME LDE in the
mid 1970's. He snookered in Villard, Simpson,myself, and others into
analysing it. When pressed it turns out he got the date and time wrong. This
is AFTER he published it in Nature. AFTER there were at least 3 QST articles.
It was a profound waste of time, and threw profound doubt as to whether there
was an LDE or not. I still remember one of my prof's who said:" What do you
expect? They're hams".
Now before I get all kinds of righteous insults keep in mind there are plenty
of profs who are hams too. But there is a lesson here: call 'wolf' and you
will lose ALL credibility.
Watch out for those 'wow's boys and girls:-)