RadioBanter - View Single Post

November 29th 05, 11:38 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: on Nov 27, 3:55 pm

wrote:
From: on Nov 26, 8:02 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

I get along with all sorts of people, Len. Including many who disagree with
me.

Not absolutely true... :-)

My statement (taken as a whole) is absolutely true, Len. ;-)

You're the one that has the problem getting along with others if they
don't agree with everything you say.

Tsk, with Jimmy it's always the other guy's fault... :-)

No, Len. Just a simple statement of fact that you have a problem
getting along with people who don't agree with everything you say.

Your behaviour here proves it.

The standards are a lot newer than "70 years old", Len.

Name some.

Iambic A and B - do you know what those are? The Morse Code
symbol for "@". Changes to standard ARRL message format,
redefinition of some prosigns and Q signals....the list goes on
and on.

The morse code test has been in amateur radio regulations
for 71 years. :-)

That's true ;-)

It's also been in the regulations for 72 years, and 73 years, and 74
years,

....

and it's been in the regulations for 93 years.

As to why anyone would fuss with Morse Code in 2005, the
reasons are the same as why anyone would fuss with:

- cars that have manual transmissions instead of automatics

No problem to me...I learned to drive in a manual-transmission auto.

Ancient history. ;-)

Didn't have to know morse code to drive...

But isn't manual transmission a "dying" technology? Why would anyone
bother to learn it in 2005?

- sailboats instead of power boats

Sailing under the wind takes much less fuel than power boats...

Morse Code takes less power than voice transmission.

and it is nice to do.

Your opinion only.

Aren't the majority of boats in the USA power
boats? Even most sailboats above a certain size carry small
motors. Most power boats don't carry sails.

didn't have to know morse code to sail.

Except for a few floating museum pieces, the US Navy stopped using
sail power about 100 years ago. There are almost no commercial uses
for sailboats in the USA - powerboats dominate all but "hobby" boating,
and power boats probably dominate hobby boating as well.

- Drawing and painting instead of photography

No problem to me...I did all three as a kid, still do.

Still have your crayons, huh?

Didn't
have to know morse code to do any of those three.

- Performing music instead of playing recordings

Tsk, how do you think recordings got to BE recordings? :-)

No morse code knowledge required in music.

- Bicycles, running and walking for transport instead of motor vehicles

No problem to me. Last California DMV retest (and every one
before that) didn't require any morse code skill.

- Stairs instead of elevators

How do you categorize escalators? :-)

No morse code knowledge required for stairs, escalators, or
elevators.

- Homemade food instead of packaged

How do you categorize campfire cooking? :-)

Is that where your cooking winds up, Len?

Cooking doesn't require morse code knowledge.

Because I know something of those times and the creation of the
Extra class license.

Ah, but you weren't THERE in all those times... :-)

So? I still know more about the creation of the Extra class license
than you do.

YOU have talked much about Reggie Fessenden and his carbon-mike-in-
the-antenna "AM voice transmission" of 1906 and (allegedly) 1900.

That's right. Was any of my information incorrect?

Weren't you reading from your own lab notes when you described
all that happening 99 to 105 years ago? :-)

Was any of my information incorrect?

Show me ANY evidence that ANY AM transmitter since 1906 has
used amplitude modulation via a carbon microphone in series
with the antenna lead... :-)

Why?

I was there then, did it, came back. Never used
any morse code then on three dozen transmitters, never had to.

It sure does seem that you talk about things that happened long
before you were born, but get mad when others talk about things
that happened long before *they* were born. As if it's OK for
you to do but not others.

Tsk, I was 20 years old in 1953, Jimmy. Already been born
two decades prior. :-)

Where were you in 1906?

"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Incorrect. It is a part of electronics, a technology discipline.

Nope. It's a separate subset. Electronics does not include things
like antennas. Radio does.

Are "antennas" a whole separate field of physics? :-)

Nope. They're a part of electrical engineering.

"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

INCORRECT.

What parts of electronics are not covered by electrical engineering,
Len?

Tsk, tsk, trying to get around your gaffe by bringing in
"engineering?" :-)

What gaffe, Len? "Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Electronics is one TECHNOLOGY DISCIPLINE of physics.

No, it isn't.

Physics is a science. Electrical engineering is a form of engineering,
and electronics is a subset of that.

Sigh...you still haven't gotten the correct definitions... :-(

Well, Len, since you make up your definitions as you go along, you're
bound to have disagreements.

Your mistakes (like the ones Hans pointed out
about DD-214s) are embarrassing.

You are confused. I made NO mistake about DD-214s.

Yes, you did. Also UCMJ, usenet, and many others. Buck
up and learn to live with your own imperfections, Len.

Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Amateur radio definitions seldom jibe with the rest of the
world of electronics...and radio. :-)

Yours don't jive with anything - like your spelling.

The word "jibe" (with a B, not a V) is perfectly correct in my
context. Look it up. :-)

For someone who uses so many smileys, you're certainly
humor-impaired, Len.

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

Why do you consider yourself so "significant?" :-)

It's not about me, Len.

Tsk, everything you post in here is about YOU. :-)

INCORRECT

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

It is a "good thing" only to those that took that test and
passed it, thus fulfilling the "proper jump through hoops"
of "tradition." :-)

Incorrect. There were comments to the FCC by people who had
not passed the Morse Code test which said it was a good thing
and should be retained.

Sorry, Jimmy, they were outnumbered by those who wanted the TEST
gone. :-)

Of course. But the exceptions prove your sweeping statement to be
false.

If you actually read all of the comments, you'd know that.

Each and every filing from 15 July 2005 to 23 November 2005.
3,795 of them. :-)

So you claim, but the evidence says otherwise.

When you make a sweeping general statement, and someone
proves an exception, the statement is shown to be false. That's
basic logic.

No, Jimmy, all that proves is EXCEPTIONS. :-)

In your illogical mind, I suppose.

There's NO "logic" in your exceptions statements, only spite...

YOU are NOT in the FCC.

Neither are you, Len.

YOU are NOT in the FCC. Never were. It doesn't look like you
will ever be in the FCC...

The same is even more true of you, Len.

Tsk, your definition of "polite" seems to be everyone agreeing
with you and giving your gratuitous praise for whatever you do.

Nope. That's *your* definition.

Tsk, another morseman with the "mirror syndrome" displayed.

Yes, I hold up a mirror to your misbehaviour, and you don't like
what you see.

FCC does not consider
*you* to be qualified to operate an amateur radio station, though.

Wrong on two accounts.

How so? Did you get an amateur radio license?

First of all, I already got a Commercial
Radiotelephone license 49 years ago so the FCC "qualified" me
(legally) to do so.

Nope. Wrong. Incorrect.

Your Commercial license does not qualify you to operate an
amateur radio station. Legally, you are the same as a person
with no license at all when it comes to operating an amateur
radio station.

Secondly, I've never tested for any amateur
radio license

(that's good)

so the FCC cannot say I am either "qualified" or
"unqualified."

Incorrect again!

FCC considers every unlicensed person to be unqualified to operate
an amateur radio station. That's why they issue licenses - to identify
those who are qualified.

FCC says you're not qualified to operate an amateur radio station.

Third, by law, to operate ON THE FREQUENCIES
allocated only to radio amateurs requires an amateur radio
license, neither "qualification" or "unqualification" but just
a condition of the regulations.

Three wrongs in two counts!

The license is the qualification. By definition. FCC says you're
not qualified to operate an amateur radio station.

It's understandable that you'd not understand a superior intellect, Len

When one shows up, I'll be sure NOT to understand them.

You prove that with every reply to me...

OTOH I understand you all too well. That's why you're so hostile to me.

"Hostile?" What you mean "hostile," white man?

There you go. How do you know I'm "white"?

Po' bebbe, y'all been trin' ta shoot down all them NCTAs fer
years and ya dint do it. Tsk, tsk. All dat HOSTILE in-tent
of yourn.

Gee, we'll have to add "racist" to Len's profile...

Len, you're and NCI BELIEVER. You're so biased that you cannot
conduct enough to see what really happens.

Oh, my, you are doing the word-twisting thing today!

Just the facts.

I was against the code test long before Bruce Perens put NCI
together.

Prove it.

I don't speak FOR NCI but you are going to try to MISDIRECT
the thread flow to make that a cause celebre'. Not buying
that.

Fact is, I proved you wrong.

Try to think about marriage for YOU, Jimmy. It would make you
less of a one-track Believer.

Len, for all you know, I could have more marriage experience than
you have.

Judging by all the time you spend in here...I'd say you have NO
"experience" right now. :-) Or you don't really work for a
living (thereby getting more free time to surf the newsgroup).

Ah yes, a desperate phishing expedition, as Len tries to extract
personal information. Doesn't work, Len.

Yes, Len, your control-freak ego sure does go off at times.
Telling everyone How It Should Be.

Tsk, more mirror gazing on your part, Jimmy.

All I'm doing - in between replying to some of the PCTA heckling -
is trying to get rid of the code test.

INCORRECT

You've already taken that test, will never have to test for it
again unless you miss the last renewal date and expire that
license.

Doesn't matter - I could pass it again easily. You can't even pass it
once.

YOU are telling ALL NEWCOMERS to test for morse code. You've been
doing that for years. Why are you so hostile to newcomers?

Telling someone the Morse Code test is a good thing isn't hostile, Len.
Except maybe to you, who sees any disagreement as hostile.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

Tsk, there you go again with nasty attitude.

IOW, yes, you're afraid.

You are nuts.

Not me. I'm not the one who's afraid to turn on a receiver and
listen to the low ends of the HF amateur bands....

Have been for a very long time...ever since getting my
"first job in radio."

So you're old. Big deal. You want a merit badge?

At the end of my "first job in radio" I got a DD-214. You don't
have one.

How do you know, Len?

WHAT are YOU going to tell ME?

That Morse Code is alive and well in the amateur bands.

Wonderful for you, then. You will always have a morseman to play
with.

Is contesting "operation" your main interest in amateur radio?

One of my main interests in amateur radio. I have several. You don't
seem to have any.

"It must drive you nuts not knowing" what my interests are... :-)

I know what they are, Len.

Considering your near-complete ignorance of Morse Code and
amateur radio, it's a good thing you didn't talk about those
subjects.

"Near-complete ignorance?!?"

Yes.

Sunday is another nice
get-together with good people, and I don't expect any of the
talk will be about amateur radio or morse code or contests or
the beeping state of the radio art.

That's good, considering that you're hardly a good role model.

"Hardly a good role model?!?"

Yep.

Tsk, tsk, that is HOSTILITY, Jimmy. Why are you so hostile?

I'm not the one calling people names, Len.

No "contests" of any real kind. Sunnuvagun!

Can't take the competition, huh?

Try to understand that normal social behavior is NOT about
"competition." Normal, that is, not some HOSTILE type who
always has to sound more important than the group...such
behavior exemplified by the PCTA.

Gee, Len, almost all of your postings here are your attempt to
sound smarter than the group.