First, thank you for your many excellent contributions, I hope you will continue to share your ideas here on Part15.us
Agreeing to disagree is what we strive for here, as long as it's a multilateral agreement.
Unfortunately, strong opinions often lead classic logic flaws that debase an otherwise robust discussion. As you are clearly highly intelligent, I'm guessing you would be most interested in my reasoning
For example
Using the term 'external power amplifiers' could be called a red herring as no one was talking about external amplifiers. We were discussing using coordinated units, each with a power input of no more than 100 mW DC to the final section as specified in the regulations
The opening sentence 'I want to perfectly clear as to "my opinion" as to the use' could be portrayed as an Appeal to Ridicule
Posting sections of the regulations as the majority of the content of your offering (and posting it double spaced - not very nice) could be described as an Appeal to Authority
Making a statement like 'Unless I am misreading this rule and don't understand its meaning' could be called a False Dilemma as there are many reasons you might have the opinion you offer.
'And thus, I welcome the discussion of carrier current systems for the purposes of education, but not for encouraging the practice with Part 15 transmitters and equipment' seems to line up as a great example of Begging the Question
'This is not just the antenna, but the whole system in its entirety.' seems to wander dangerously close to an Appeal to Ignorance
And as a final example of passion-induced slips of the tongue, we have 'CFR 47 is a dynamic document.' which is hard not to see as a classic example of Poisoning the Well, which is notable as this was the very well you were drawing from earlier in your argument 🙂
Thanks again for all of your great comments and as the old sergeant on "Hill Street Blues" used to say, "Let's be careful out there!"