In article <JaCdnf-q-e6IA5DbnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@adelphia.com>,
Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:

> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
> news:mbs703dhu4djpifoepou650021jod1m1pd@4ax.com:
>
> > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 08:01:56 -0700, Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote
> > in <labolide-093C25.08015623032007@news.giganews.com>:
> >
> >>I think it only covers his commute in Oakland.
> >
> > 1. I don't commute, through Oakland or anywhere else.
> >
> > 2. My observations are based on numerous carefully-controlled tests of
> > multiple handsets throughout the greater San Francisco Bay Area.
> >
>
> And exactly what "controls" were in place? What calibration instrumentaion
> was used to baseline each unit? What was the timeframe of the testing?
> How were atmospheric changes addressed and compensated for?
>
> Unless you can answer all of those questions (and more) with answers that
> follow the generall aceepted practices of testing cellular coverage, youyr
> little experiment belongs in an elementary school science fair- about third
> grade would be appropriate.

Let me answer this one for him . The calibration instrument is V3xx.