From: on Tues, Nov 29 2005 3:38 am

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. ;-)

No, not "absolute." You become upset and combative to any
remark not accepting morse code as the finest mode in radio.


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.

Tsk, tsk..."always the other guy's fault.


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,

Not longer than 71 years in the regulations of the FCC. It
was created in 1934.


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. ;-)

You have no valid comparison to morse code. Try not to venture
into areas where you have no competence.

When my wife and I got our new 2005 Chevy Malibu in June, we both
had to learn part of its transmission control, very different in
it's "low" setting from previous Chevrolets with automatic
transmission. That automatic transmission allows manual gear
changing. The automatic transmission on our older 1992 Chevy
Cavalier Wagon allowed manual gear changing. The automatic
transmission on our even older 1982 Chevy Berlinetta Camaro
(as well as my old '70 Camaro and '67 Camaro) allowed manual
gear changing.


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?

Manual transmission is not favored in many states due to emission
limits, by law, not by the fact that manual transmissions are a
decided inconvenience.

Truck-tractors have manual transmissions. Most cars equipped with
automatic transmissions can also do manual gear changing; they
just don't have any clutch.

- sailboats instead of power boats

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

Morse Code takes less power than voice transmission.

There is NO federal requirement to learn morse code in order
to pilot a sailing vessel.

Obviously you've never been on a water vessel that had "sound-
powered" telecommunications sets. No DC or AC power needed to
operate them. There is no equivalent for telegraphy.



Except for a few floating museum pieces, the US Navy stopped using
sail power about 100 years ago.

Go to the docking area at the U.S. Naval Academy or the U.S. Coast
Guard Academy. Are those "tall ships" illusions? No, they are
real.

No morse code skill is needed to pilot a sail or power boat.

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.

That is an absolute? Very well, we will put you down as a
claimed "Master of Marine Craft."

There are NO commercial uses for morse code skill in the USA
except for the companies selling morse code practice material.


- Drawing and painting instead of photography

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

Still have your crayons, huh?

Ha. Ha. You would be a hit at the Art Center School of Design
in the Pasadena area of Greater Los Angeles. Pasadena forensics
could practice on what was left of you after saying that. When
I went to Art Center it was in the city of Los Angeles, on 3rd
Street, somewhat near CBS City and the Pan-Pacific Auditorium.

Do you need lessons in art, illustration, or photography? I can
give you them and show how it is done by actual examples. My
photographs and illustrations have been published in national
magazines. I can work with nearly all media in art and
illustration: pencil, pen, (yes) crayon (but of a type that
isn't sold to children), chalk, ink on scratchboard, Ben Day
screen illustration board, oils, watercolors, caesin paints,
brush or air-brush (my Paasche air-brush compressor still
works although I preferred the CO2 bottle pressure system
common in commercial practice). I've given up "canvas" for
painting in preference for the finer linen media.

Tell us how morse code skill is used in art or illustration or
photography?

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

Still don't.


- Homemade food instead of packaged

How do you categorize campfire cooking? :-)

Is that where your cooking winds up, Len?

Only when camping, Jimmy, and then into the interior of fellow
campers.

Try not to "get along so well with others" in your writing.
It looks hostile and argumentative.


Cooking doesn't require morse code knowledge.

Tsk, it still doesn't.


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?

It would further prove the efficacy of "morse code efficiency"
to all others. You have a need to be "superior." Demonstrate
that with more of your little factoids.



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

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

Electronics is a part of Physics. Part of Electronics is SCIENCE.
What isn't science is technology. Application of electronic
technology is done in electrical and electronic engineering.



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.

You have never, ever been subject to the Uniform Code of
Military Justice. You have never had a DD-214 issued to
you. You will never have a DD-214 issued to you. You
cannot ever understand the actual implications of the UCMJ
other than some casual thing that applies only to others.


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

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.


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.

The evidence is the filings on WT Docket 05-235. All 3,796 of
them from 15 July 2005 to 25 November 2005. Note that one
more has been added in the ECFS.

There is NO "evidence" at www.ah0a.org except in the highly-
biased opinion of a long-time morseman...one whose Petitions
before the Commission have been DENIED.


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.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.




Your Commercial license does not qualify you to operate an
amateur radio station.

Your amateur radio operator's license does NOT "qualify" you
to operate any commercial radio station, radionavigation
station, space-communications station, radiosonde station,
radar of any kind, television transmitter, aircraft
transmitter, maritime vessel transmitter, land mobile radio
service transmitter, or microwave radio relay station.
Mine does.

Legally, you are the same as a person
with no license at all when it comes to operating an amateur
radio station.

Do you wish to take me to civil court? Federal court?

Why all the hostility and combative behavior on your part
over NPRM 05-143?



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

(that's good)

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.


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

Incorrect again!

You do not understand the difference between "qualified" and
AUTHORIZED.



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.

Wrong. The FCC issues licenses as part of their overall civil
radio regulatory task.

The FCC was never chartered by LAW to be an academic or skill-
achievement agency. They AUTHORIZE license holders to operate
and transmit RF energy according to the regulations pertaining
to the type and kind of radio service they are AUTHORIZED in.


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

The FCC has "said" no such thing to me. They've never once
written to me that I am "unqualified" in anything...



The license is the qualification.

It is an AUTHORIZATION. It is a PERMISSION. It is a GRANT.

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

No, I am not permitted - by regulation - to transmit RF energy
exceeding incidental RF radiation limits on allocated amateur-
only frequencies without possessing an amateur radio license
grant.

The military of the United States and the federal government of
the United States (other than the FCC) have QUALIFIED me to
operate radio transmitters according to military/government
regulations. Experience in actual successful transmission of
RF energy has furthered that qualification.


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

Just the facts.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.

Some of your facts are mistaken. That's just the way it is.



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

Prove it.

Go to the FCC Reading Room and look up correspondence to them
prior to the earliest ECFS-available date. That is an un-
alterable third-party reference.

I did not keep ALL correspondence I've done in the last four
decades. I cannot digitize and present what I no longer have.
The FCC Reading Room keeps records intact, archived.


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.

Incorrect. I've pointed out your mistakes. You refuse to
accept them. That's just the way you are.


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.

More hostility and combativeness. Tsk, NOT "getting along with
others" on your part.

I have never taken any amateur radio license test, therefore I
neither "passed" nor "failed" it. That only proves the PAST.

You stated what I allegedly "could not do" in the future.
You are not prescient, cannot tell the future. Ergo, your
remark is simply one of hostility and combatativeness.



Telling someone the Morse Code test is a good thing isn't hostile, Len.

Sorry, it IS hostile when you presume your opinion to be an
absolute. It is only your opinion. You frequently try to make
your opinions as absolutes. That is wrong.



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....

Your implication of "cowardice" is misplaced. First, I was
not at any HF receiver during most of the Thanksgiving Day
holiday weekend. Second, I've already "turned on and listened"
to all parts of the MF and HF spectrum...many times...even
looked at it with a spectrum analyzer.



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

How do you know, Len?

You've never served in the armed forces of the United States.
Had you done so, you would have received a DD-214 as a release
from active duty. You've said you did not serve, ergo you
cannot have a DD-214. You will never have a DD-214.


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

I know what they are, Len.

Incorrect again. All you "know" is what I've written in here.
I've not written about all of my "interests" or "what I've
done" or "what I do."


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.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.


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

"Hardly a good role model?!?"

Yep.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. More combative hostility and a decided LACK of
ability to get along with others on your part.


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

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

True, you are just hostile and combative. The ones who call
others "names" in here is Dudly the Imposter and a few other
anonymous posters.


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.

Tsk, subjective opinion on your part. Can't take competition?