If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

L. wrote:
I have a ton of books in my reach too - so whats your point?

If you are ambitious enough to already possess the knowledge,
you don't need the books. I am too lazy to try to possess all
knowledge so I need the books. Not having to memorize all
knowledge frees up my mind for creative thought.

And as for "Hitler" claiming that - as you said about his admiration for a
brilliant lazy man - eh......... last I heard - the man was a fruit cake,
lost the war, cost thousands of lives, innocent ones at that - and ended up
committing suicide - WHAT A LOSER. And I would want to follow his
examples/principles - why?

The statements that I quoted were from a WWI German military
leader probably uttered while Hitler was still a private or
corporal. Why do you have to try to misrepresent what I said?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Al Klein wrote:
Since frequency assignments aren't theory, your question is both
irrelevant and incompetent.

So the questions on my Extra exam were irrelevant?
In that, I tend to agree with you. I would like to
see one and only one entry level amateur radio exam
leading to one brotherhood of amateur radio operators
devoid of the jealousy, pecking order, and back-biting
apparent in your postings and others.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Al Klein wrote:
But, since you don't know the difference between "learning" and
"memorizing", nor which subjects fall into which category, you
probably can't see the parallel.

Learning is impossible without memorizing. You are
simply ignorant of the definition of the words you
are using. Is English your second language? Again,
from Websters: "memorize - to commit to memory"
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t...
L. wrote:
I don't care what "YOUR" dictionary shows. There are some out there for
example which show the word COCK for example - as a type of Bird OR the
preparing of a rifle or gun for firing and leave it at that - while a
"few" others will show the "Slang" term used - as many do - meaning
sexual organ. SO - ALL DICTIONARYS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL.

From my dictionary: "cock - 5. Slang (vulgar) a. penis. b. sexual
relations with a man."

Seems my 2230 page unabridged dictionary covers slang very well but
does not have a slang definition for "memorize". Please try again.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

I don't care what your dictionary says. PEOPLE MISUSE words ALL the time -
and definately in this case. "I" again STATE - "I" DID NOT START the "hair
splitting" argument. I was merely trying to rationalize where BOTH of you
were coming from and sadly neither of you know yourselves. AGAIN I SAY -
THIS WHOLE FREAKING ARGUMENT IS - STUPID.

L.

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Al Klein wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Here's the crux of your communications problem. From Webster's:

"The absolutely worst source of the definition of a technical term is
a non-technical dictionary.

"Memorize" is NOT a technical word. Please get
back to us when you have talked the IEEE into
putting your special definition of "memorize"
into their technical dictionary.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t...
L. wrote:
I have a ton of books in my reach too - so whats your point?

If you are ambitious enough to already possess the knowledge,
you don't need the books. I am too lazy to try to possess all
knowledge so I need the books. Not having to memorize all
knowledge frees up my mind for creative thought.

And as for "Hitler" claiming that - as you said about his admiration for
a brilliant lazy man - eh......... last I heard - the man was a fruit
cake, lost the war, cost thousands of lives, innocent ones at that - and
ended up committing suicide - WHAT A LOSER. And I would want to follow
his examples/principles - why?

The statements that I quoted were from a WWI German military
leader probably uttered while Hitler was still a private or
corporal. Why do you have to try to misrepresent what I said?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

OK, so maybe I misrepresented your quote "by accident" - big deal. HITLER
was still a loser as was/is ANY ONE who bought/buys into that STUPID
philosophy you spoke of. Pretty damned sad when you - speaking of ANYONE it
applies to - are too "lazy" to "learn". That is almost laughable. Creative
thinking - without knowledge? Surely you jest!

I'm done arguing with someone who is "too" lazy to "learn". I'd prefer to
talk to those who have "intelligence" to refer to - to stimulate the
conversation. Good luck in your monologue.

L.

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Al Klein wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Laziness allows one to achieve a goal by the most efficient
route. Some famous German military leader said he would
lots rather have brilliant and lazy officers than ambitious
and stupid ones.

As I recall, he was also known as one of the most idiotic strategists
the species has ever produced. His "fame" didn't stop him from being
the almost single-handed reason his country lost its big war, did it?

This was a WWI German officer and I don't recall his name.
Why do you think he was an idiotic strategist? Why do you
think he single-handedly lost WWI? If you know so much about
him, what was his name?

Being both intelligent and ambitious doesn't appear on your radar?

The pride, lust, and greed usually accompanying ambition are
a good percentage of the seven deadly sins.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

L. wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t...
L. wrote:
I have a ton of books in my reach too - so whats your point?

If you are ambitious enough to already possess the knowledge,
you don't need the books. I am too lazy to try to possess all
knowledge so I need the books. Not having to memorize all
knowledge frees up my mind for creative thought.

And as for "Hitler" claiming that - as you said about his admiration for
a brilliant lazy man - eh......... last I heard - the man was a fruit
cake, lost the war, cost thousands of lives, innocent ones at that - and
ended up committing suicide - WHAT A LOSER. And I would want to follow
his examples/principles - why?

The statements that I quoted were from a WWI German military
leader probably uttered while Hitler was still a private or
corporal. Why do you have to try to misrepresent what I said?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

OK, so maybe I misrepresented your quote "by accident" - big deal.
it shows that you are ignorant of what you are tlaking about
HITLER
was still a loser as was/is ANY ONE who bought/buys into that STUPID
philosophy you spoke of.
base effort t atr anyone that believes something you don't as a Nazi
Pretty damned sad when you - speaking of ANYONE it
applies to - are too "lazy" to "learn". That is almost laughable. Creative
thinking - without knowledge? Surely you jest!
without occopiing ones mind by consdiering triva

I'm done arguing with someone who is "too" lazy to "learn". I'd prefer to
talk to those who have "intelligence" to refer to - to stimulate the
conversation. Good luck in your monologue.

hardly a monlogou why do you misrepresent the state of reality

L.

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

L. wrote:
THIS WHOLE FREAKING ARGUMENT IS - STUPID.

Yes, now you are getting it. I remember when hams like you
were trying to keep the single-sidewinders off the air in
the 1950's.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

L. wrote:
I'm done arguing with someone who is "too" lazy to "learn". I'd prefer to
talk to those who have "intelligence" to refer to - to stimulate the
conversation.

My MENSA membership number is 1006281.
What's your MENSA membership number?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp