|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:02:51 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a license is to memorize the answers." How else one can know that the unit of resistance is the "ohm", except by memorizing? There's a difference between knowing that the unit of resistance is the Ohm, and remembering that the answer to the question about Kirchoff with the 3 resistors is 10,000 ohms. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:02:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a license is to memorize the answers." How else one can know that the unit of resistance is the "ohm", except by memorizing? There's a difference between knowing that the unit of resistance is the Ohm, and remembering that the answer to the question about Kirchoff with the 3 resistors is 10,000 ohms. someone could memorize that sort of detail I spuose but you nor your friends have ever advanced any evidence that this occurs Indeed I don't think it is possible to memorize enough to pass the test and learn nothing in the bargan I can't prove that of course but it does seem likely |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote in
: On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:14:17 GMT, Slow Code wrote: The fit get a ham license. All the rest get cell phones, CB, and shortwave listening. No, SC - in today's society we can't hurt people's feelings, so the loud get anything they want. I guess that means I got to get louder too. LOL SC |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Slow Code wrote: Al Klein wrote in : On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:14:17 GMT, Slow Code wrote: The fit get a ham license. All the rest get cell phones, CB, and shortwave listening. No, SC - in today's society we can't hurt people's feelings, so the loud get anything they want. I guess that means I got to get louder too. LOL it is way too late for that SC SC |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote:
And none of the current crop of CBers is qualified to provide military (or any other coherent form of) communications. Why? I assume you really mean that the current crop of new hams needs education. Have you done anything? How many new hams have you elmered? Are you active on 2m? Do you speak to new no-code hams and offer to teach them morse code, let them see your HF station in operation? Have them assist you during contests? If all you do is hang out on the HF bands, and complain about how bad the new hams are, they will stay that way. Whose fault is that? 73, Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 24 Jul 2006 16:27:04 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: someone could memorize that sort of detail I spuose but you nor your friends have ever advanced any evidence that this occurs Indeed I don't think it is possible to memorize enough to pass the test and learn nothing in the bargan I can't prove that of course but it does seem likely It's so likely that people have bragged about it. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
And none of the current crop of CBers is qualified to provide military (or any other coherent form of) communications. CW is not coherent. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Slow Code wrote: (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote in : Al Klein wrote: 73, Geoff. We don't have to leave or complain if we can improve licensing a little. That's what's happening here. Striving for quality. indeed we drop the code testing and imporve the quaility right SC |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Cecil Moore wrote: wrote: The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means of communicating. Therein lies the solution to the problem. Make A1 the only mode allowed within amateur radio - solves all the problems, doesn't it? No more mode arguments, no more band crowding, no more expensive equipment, ... The list of advantages is virtually endless. OK, fair enough. The Amateur Radio Service of the 21st century will be all CW without a Morse Code Exam. We'll go out of existance EXACTLY like we came in. I'm sure that will make the Morseodists happy. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, wrote: Al Klein wrote: By taking the test you're claiming that you understand the questions and know the answers. By releasing the Question Pools, the FCC is claiming that you must memorize the answers. Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a license is to memorize the answers." No, not all all. It should be obvious that if you can make a ridiculous statement such as the one you made above, I can make a ridiculous statement also. No one is claiming any such thing. I guess you missed this part which is key to you're not understanding that my statement was ridiculous. By memorizing the answers you're not learning enough to understand the questions. But I wouldn't expect you to understand what "honesty" means. Why not? Because he's already admitted that he's dishonest. When will you admit that you are dishonest? how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge? No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is putting the law "over all ham knowledge". CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska). Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ... There is no pass/fail practical for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY, FAX, Packet, PSK, etc, etc, etc. How progressive is it? How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah, that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air. Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se guys want to "beef up" the written exams? We don't. That is not true. We want to get back the level it used to be before it was dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics. You're referring to the Conditional license, right? Just by guessing at the answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics. You tell me? Was it 2 or was it 3? Is this your lucky day? From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that I've forgotten at the moment. You should self-modify your license and cease amateur operation until you remember. The amateur is self-policing, and you no longer meet your own standard. They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. Other things are relevant today that weren't even known 50 years ago. how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more operators What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.) It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already assembled. But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally. No you didn't. Today all you need is the time to take the test and the money for the test and the equipment. IOW, a CB "license" with a tiny bit of annoyance up front. How does CB benefit the country? Sounds like you need to look for a different hobby if you have such disdain for your fellow amateurs. Best of Luck. You don't acquire knowledge (which is what's needed) by playing with a radio. Then the military has wasted billions of dollars over the years "training" radio operators. I trained operators when I was in the military. We didn't do it by giving recruits radios and telling them to go jam each other. I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military. I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce power once. how patriotic is it to keep a staion forom aquiing the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community? How does playing CB on the ham bands give one "the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community"? Who knows? That's not what Mark is talking about, is it? That's exactly what he's talking about. Give someone a radio and a "license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up above. How does one acquire skill by playing radio? We self-train. It is a continuous process of improvements. You mistakenly believe that at the conclusion of The Exam, the "operator" is 100%. Never was, Never will be, and neither were you weren't. I'm beginning to think that you're from the school of "The Older I Get, The Better I Was!" Or any skill, other than getting what you want? You don't acquire skill by doing something that requires no skill. So it really is all about CW. Why have a written Exam at all? You don't acquire technical skill by doing something that doesn't require technical skill. You don't acquire operating skill by doing something that requires no operating skill. And you don't acquire skill in CW by cursing into a mike. Nor do you. But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators" if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic? I've listened to emergency responders on a scanner before. They don't use Morse Code, they don't use CW. They use FM/Voice. Somehow they are effective at it, not having taken a Morse Code test. How can this be? Tell you what. The next time your YL dials 911 for you, she has to communicate with the 911 Operator in Morse Code. She can just sound it out with her mouth, no keyer, sounder, clacker or anything else required. When the Operator tells her to speak normally, your YL is allowed to say once, and only once, using her normal voice, "Real communications takes place with Morse Code" and then revert back to sounding out her message with Morse Code dits and dahs. Agreed? On your block of granite, she will say, "Here Lays Al Klein, Who had no use for Voice Modes. May He Rest In Peace" And you, particularly, don't acquire knowledge by demanding something for nothing. The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means of communicating. So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too obvious to need mentioning. Please diagram that radio from "Scratch." Get over it. Everyone else is moving on. Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a test should actually test for something. There are actually millions of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing in the world. Dial 911 and tell the operator that you don't need instant gratification, take your time. What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries? You seem to be confused. DXCC is an award offered by the ARRL, not the FCC. It has nothing to do with licensing. You ask "What next?" How about a test for everyone else except you, where you get to try to recall what was on your test, but can't. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:14:17 GMT, Slow Code wrote: The fit get a ham license. All the rest get cell phones, CB, and shortwave listening. No, SC - in today's society we can't hurt people's feelings, so the loud get anything they want. Al, you're getting louder. SC has been loud for a long time. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? -- 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: Al Klein wrote: Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. "I" There. You just got ONE "character" of several electronics-related formulas. Now do something with it without knowing the rest of the "characters" that go with it. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
K4YZ wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- 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 . .. K4YZ wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp In some cases, it "could" be said that hairs are being split. To have "knowledge" of the code - could mean basically - you know it exists and why it is used. To "know" the Morse Code, usually refers to KNOWING the characters sufficiently to use them at whatever speed it is you can. On the other hand, someone who isn't involved could say - that a Ham operator is "knowledgable" in the code. Heck, to someone not IN Ham radio - they could easily assume a NO CODE tech - KNOWS code. Memory plays a big part be it with learning CODE OR Electronics formulas. MEMORY plays a huge part in "remembering" how to solder correctly and so on. You have to MEMORIZE these things just like code characters - to be proficient. Just like MEMORIZING traffic signs and so on - to get your license to drive. I think there is too big a deal being made here. It comes down to - if you want to do ANYTHING - be it do morse code, drive, parachuting, whatever - you have to MEMORIZE SOMETHING - to make it happen. Lou/ka3flu |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"clfe" wrote in message
... "Cecil Moore" wrote in message . .. K4YZ wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp In some cases, it "could" be said that hairs are being split. To have "knowledge" of the code - could mean basically - you know it exists and why it is used. To "know" the Morse Code, usually refers to KNOWING the characters sufficiently to use them at whatever speed it is you can. On the other hand, someone who isn't involved could say - that a Ham operator is "knowledgable" in the code. Heck, to someone not IN Ham radio - they could easily assume a NO CODE tech - KNOWS code. Just to clarify my point - many "assume" a Ham Operator - regardless the license - KNOWS code. So, if a "No Code" tech simply says "I"M A HAM OPERATOR" to someone not knowing the license class structure, the "assumption is made. AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. Morse Code (per my recollection) has always been and most likely - even if only in history books - always will be known and associated with HAM RADIO. lou |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
clfe wrote:
It comes down to - if you want to do ANYTHING - be it do morse code, drive, parachuting, whatever - you have to MEMORIZE SOMETHING - to make it happen. My point exactly! I'm not the one saying that memorizing is evil. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 2006-08-03, Cecil Moore wrote:
You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. Are you trying to confuse the issue by using logic? The (no)morse issue is nothing other than a purely emotional thing. FWIW - I took the test, I passed it (barely), I used it twice. AlMost all of my contacts are either 20m psk31 or 6m ssb. -- Alex/AB2RC |
Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
The term "lid" may have originated from newbie Morse operators laying a lid on top of the relay receiver to make it easier to distinguish the dots from the dashes. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp My mother told me stories of learning morse code this way when she worked for the railroad. She then taught me morse code this way. For twenty yeasrs after that I always wanted to be a ham and finally got m ylicense at about age 35. I was fairly active for about 8 years and pretty much lost interest when my daughter was born. In the last couple of years I have been sporatially interested again but their alaways seems to be little projects and interest that pull me away from it. When I first went to work at tmy present job almost every tech that worked there was a ham. Just about all of them retired within a few years and nnd only a couple are still active on the ham bands. They pretty much all say that they just dont have time for it anymore. This is where ham radio is going, It is losing out to living. I havent gotten totally out of it yet and am occasionally involed. Usually working on an antenna project thinking I will become active again. I have been asked to assist some girl scouts in getting badges but I am having a lot of trouble finding scouts that are interested although the requirements are very minimal |
Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
"Jimmie D" wrote in
: The term "lid" may have originated from newbie Morse operators laying a lid on top of the relay receiver to make it easier to distinguish the dots from the dashes. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp My mother told me stories of learning morse code this way when she worked for the railroad. She then taught me morse code this way. For twenty yeasrs after that I always wanted to be a ham and finally got m ylicense at about age 35. I was fairly active for about 8 years and pretty much lost interest when my daughter was born. In the last couple of years I have been sporatially interested again but their alaways seems to be little projects and interest that pull me away from it. When I first went to work at tmy present job almost every tech that worked there was a ham. Just about all of them retired within a few years and nnd only a couple are still active on the ham bands. They pretty much all say that they just dont have time for it anymore. This is where ham radio is going, It is losing out to living. I havent gotten totally out of it yet and am occasionally involed. Usually working on an antenna project thinking I will become active again. I have been asked to assist some girl scouts in getting badges but I am having a lot of trouble finding scouts that are interested although the requirements are very minimal Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like hams, they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW is important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone like any CB'er can do. SC |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 15:35:11 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: clfe wrote: It comes down to - if you want to do ANYTHING - be it do morse code, drive, parachuting, whatever - you have to MEMORIZE SOMETHING - to make it happen. My point exactly! I'm not the one saying that memorizing is evil. No, you're the one misrepresenting "memorizing answers, as opposed to memorization per se, is wrong" means "memorizing is evil". |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
No, you're the one misrepresenting "memorizing answers, as opposed to memorization per se, is wrong" means "memorizing is evil". How the heck can someone know that the ohm is the unit of resistance without memorizing it? How can you possibly develop Ohm's family name from first principles? I memorized the ARRL License Manual in the early 1950's in order to obtain my first two amateur radio licenses. Memorizing license manuals is absolutely nothing new. -- 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... Al Klein wrote: No, you're the one misrepresenting "memorizing answers, as opposed to memorization per se, is wrong" means "memorizing is evil". How the heck can someone know that the ohm is the unit of resistance without memorizing it? How can you possibly develop Ohm's family name from first principles? I memorized the ARRL License Manual in the early 1950's in order to obtain my first two amateur radio licenses. Memorizing license manuals is absolutely nothing new. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp I "may" be going out on a limb here but I THINK I may have figured out what Al Klein is speaking of - possibly misrepresenting his line of thinking in the scope of things - thus causing the confusion. I THINK his idea of memorization or what he is referring to is as such - lets say you have someone who wants to pass their ham exam. They buy a manual and instead of reading the damned thing to LEARN the ins and outs of ham radio, applicable theory, rules, regulations and so on - they simply try to memorize each answer which is shown as the right answer - merely by A, B, C or D. Some clown I knew, tried this - he didn't take into account that the tests were not always in that order - when it came to the answers. Am I correct Mr. Klein? lou/ka3flu |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:49:46 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: No, you're the one misrepresenting "memorizing answers, as opposed to memorization per se, is wrong" means "memorizing is evil". How the heck can someone know that the ohm is the unit of resistance without memorizing it? That's exactly what I mean. You're misrepresenting "memorizing that the answer to the question about the resistor with the orange band is 10,000 ohms" is the same as "memorizing the color code". |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:58:19 -0400, "clfe"
wrote: I THINK his idea of memorization or what he is referring to is as such - lets say you have someone who wants to pass their ham exam. They buy a manual and instead of reading the damned thing to LEARN the ins and outs of ham radio, applicable theory, rules, regulations and so on - they simply try to memorize each answer which is shown as the right answer - merely by A, B, C or D. Some clown I knew, tried this - he didn't take into account that the tests were not always in that order - when it came to the answers. Am I correct Mr. Klein? To paraphrase Maxwell Smart, you're thiiiiis close. Substitute "the correct answer to each question" for "A, B ..." and you've got it. Some things have to be memorized - you can't, as Cecil tells us, derive laws from first principles - but there's a difference between "the answer to the question about the oscillator is the .001ufd capacitor" and learning the basics of a Twin-T circuit. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 14:26:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Second thing. English has to go first. Bill, W6WRT |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:31:37 -0400, "clfe" wrote: AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Well then, cure the ignorance. Wouldn't that be easier than learning the code? Bill, W6WRT |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"Bill Turner" wrote in message
... ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:31:37 -0400, "clfe" wrote: AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Well then, cure the ignorance. Wouldn't that be easier than learning the code? Bill, W6WRT I "may" agree with you - in part, but we all know thats not going to happen! It is a matter of human nature. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
clfe wrote: "Bill Turner" wrote in message ... ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:31:37 -0400, "clfe" wrote: AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Well then, cure the ignorance. Wouldn't that be easier than learning the code? Bill, W6WRT I "may" agree with you - in part, but we all know thats not going to happen! It is a matter of human nature. i don't it was pretty for me one day work on one of these bike races the served organizers heard the reapteer CW id asked what it read I said hame were no longer required to be to read them and I could not, time change ignorance fixed |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On 4 Aug 2006 14:18:12 -0700, "an old freind" wrote: i don't it was pretty for me one day work on one of these bike races the served organizers heard the reapteer CW id asked what it read I said hame were no longer required to be to read them and I could not, time change ignorance fixed ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Text like the above is what comes out when I try to copy CW. Bill, W6WRT 20 WPM Extra, but just barely |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Bill Turner wrote: ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On 4 Aug 2006 14:18:12 -0700, "an old freind" wrote: i don't it was pretty for me one day work on one of these bike races the served organizers heard the reapteer CW id asked what it read I said hame were no longer required to be to read them and I could not, time change ignorance fixed ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Text like the above is what comes out when I try to copy CW. can you still read it when you do it Bill, W6WRT 20 WPM Extra, but just barely |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Bill Turner wrote:
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:31:37 -0400, "clfe" wrote: AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Well then, cure the ignorance. Wouldn't that be easier than learning the code? Bill, W6WRT Cure the ignorance ... YEP! How? Learn to copy code. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Bill Turner wrote:
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 14:26:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Second thing. English has to go first. Bill, W6WRT I'm alomost 69 years old and have forgotten most of what I learned in college. But I still remember what I learned in High School ... how to copy Morse code. I still remember what I learned in grade school ... how to ride a two wheel bicycle. Now, if I could only remember that name of the woman I've live with for the past 43 years ........... |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"an old freind" wrote in
ups.com: clfe wrote: "Bill Turner" wrote in message ... ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:31:37 -0400, "clfe" wrote: AND unless that NC tech clarifies it, the unsuspecting person will go on in ignorance "assuming" ALL hams "know" code. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Well then, cure the ignorance. Wouldn't that be easier than learning the code? Bill, W6WRT I "may" agree with you - in part, but we all know thats not going to happen! It is a matter of human nature. i don't it was pretty for me one day work on one of these bike races the served organizers heard the reapteer CW id asked what it read I said hame were no longer required to be to read them and I could not, time change ignorance fixed It's hard to figure out what you're actually trying to say sometimes Mark, but what it looks like you were trying to convey to the race organizer is that you're retarded. Sc |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Slow Code wrote: "an old freind" wrote in ups.com: It's hard to figure out what you're actually trying to say sometimes Mark, but what it looks like you were trying to convey to the race organizer is that you're retarded. never hard to understand you want Ham radio to die if can't retreat into the past but then if you got what you wanted Ham radio would truly be without a future Sc |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"an_old_friend" wrote in
ups.com: Slow Code wrote: "an old freind" wrote in ups.com: It's hard to figure out what you're actually trying to say sometimes Mark, but what it looks like you were trying to convey to the race organizer is that you're retarded. never hard to understand you want Ham radio to die if can't retreat into the past but then if you got what you wanted Ham radio would truly be without a future Handi-Hams still has a spot for you on the short bus. Sc |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com