|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Brenda Ann wrote:
Some advanced appliance operators know enough to connect other peripheral devices such as digital mode devices or power amplifiers, but do not know how these devices work, nor how to construct such devices. An amateur radio license is an entry level license. It is not a university degree. When I obtained all amateur privileges at the age of 15, I didn't know squat. All I had done is memorize the ARRL License Manual. Six years later I had a EE degree. What is wrong with learning the technical stuff after one obtains his entry level license? Do you know how to construct an IC-756PROII? -- 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: wrote: You denigrate the resistor code. Not at all. It's a lot better than having the value printed on the resistor in numbers. Even with MIL quality and transparent coatings, the numbers on 1/8 watt resistors are kind of hard to read. Even with the resistor color code, most of us *MEMORIZED* a jingle like: Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly I believe the military used to teach their technicians to *MEMORIZE* that jingle. Exactly how does one develop the resistor color code from first principles? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp How did capacitors escape getting color coded? |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Cecil Moore wrote:
lid wrote: It used to be that there weren't a set of questions with corresponding answers - there was a syllabus from which the questions were set. It took understanding of the syllabus to apply the formulae that had been learnt to calculate the answer. It is true that the 1950's License Manuals were not multiple choice but the exams were. The License Manuals went like this: Q: What is the unit of electrical resistance? A: The unit of electrical resistance is the ohm. The exam then had multiple choices, one of them being "ohm". It is hard to understand how anyone could develop that correct answer from first principles or formulas. I memorized the correct answer and it still exists in my memory as something I once memorized long before I ever knew there was a man named Ohm after whom the unit of electrical resistance was named. The difference between memorizing the question pool answers from the 1950's License Manuals and memorizing the question pool answers of today is just splitting hairs. I used exactly the same memorizing techniques to ace the Extra exam in 2000 as I did to pass the Conditional exam in 1953. Here here (!) Cecil, I'm happy to agree with you. Modern testing techniques are intended to be transparent. This is true for FCC exams, Postal exams, any and all government qualification exams. (And because of this, all qualifying exams in the private sector, as well.) It took a lot of litigation to get there. Government agencies had to prove that their qualifying exams were directly linked to the specific tasks required of the given position for which the individual was applying. A Postal Carrier needn't know Pythagorus' theorum to deliver the mail. I took the Postal Carrier exam 35 years ago and did not do well. I wasn't good at sorting on a timed basis. This notion of a "cheapening" of FCC requirements because the question pool is open to the public is a red herring: transparency is the rule. If you look at the question pool and study it, you will gain the necessary expertise to pass the exam. This is not cheating, nor is it short-circuiting the "REAL" ham radio "requirements" that some view as sacrosanct. I used ARRL manuals to pass the Extra Exam and I do not defer to anyone in this regard. Does this make me a ham radio genius? Not AT ALL. Man, I have SO MUCH to learn. This newsgroup is "potentially" very helpful! For that, I give thanks. You know, I love ham radio. I'm happy so many join the ranks each year. If there still is a concern out there, be an Elmer and address it. John AB8O (yeah, I changed my call) |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
To me, MENSA is a sort of "Who's Who". As such, one can value it
appropriately or ignore it completely. To me, it's a sort of conundrum: If you are confident in your intelligence, why do you need validation? Is it the obverse of the T-shirt "I'm with stupid"? My apologies for adding to this old and fraying thread. John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... -- Say no to institutionalized interference. Just say NO to HD/IBOC! "Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... 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 A MENSA membership means you have a high intelligence quotient. A high intelligence quotient does not necessarily mean you know anything, only that if you apply yourself that you have the ability to learn more easily than an average person. I know some very lazy MENSA members that can't even spell a large number of the words they use. In other words, even people above average intelligence can be and often are too lazy to learn. They do manage to apply what they do know better than most. Mensa - who gives a damned? Most of the "brilliant" people I've ever met - had their thumbs up their ass when it came to doing the basic things in life - they can't do them. What the hell good is a "brilliant" person if they're too stupid to know how or lazy to do "basic" things? If having a Mensa number means you're bankrupt in common sense or "lazy", I'd rather not be a member - thank you. Often, it is "common sense" which gets you through - NOT "brilliance". From all I've ever heard and /or seen - "brilliance" and "common sense" don't go hand in hand. Sitting in a chair with a bunch of books behind you to make you "appear" smart and not getting off your lazy ass to use it or to further your education - is not a "productive" person. I know a few welfare bums who fall into that description- "appear" smart, "act" smart - lazy as hell. Being in the center of a University Library with books on most any subject - is NOT going to make you any more intelligent if you don't venture to "learn". Even at that, if you don't use it, you lose it. This is funny as all hell....... some shmuck "claiming" to be a "genious" coming in here and trying to make the rest of us seem inferior to him. No one is any better than the rest of us. Their crap doesn't stink any less than ours. Just when he starts losing his grip on the argument, he pulls this so called mensa number out - just like a race card. So, what, we're supposed to take pity? Bow down? I don't think so! The answer to that is "PLONK". There was another party a few years ago tried that - and after about a month - him and his self proclaimed "geniousness" - disappeared. The idea here is to come in - share ideas, thoughts, "help" if possible - NOT try to place yourself on a throne above all. I can assure you the majority of us don't tolerate that attitude. You can agree or agree to disagree on any use of words, theories, laws, principles, strategies, etc. But when you put yourself on a pedestal....... the game is over - you'll either find one of your mensa friends to keep you company or be an awful lonely person on here. To respond to a statement regarding me in a previous post - Hams like "me" NEVER kept or attempted to keep any one off the air. If anything, I've gotten people "involved" in Amateur Radio - with one (12 years old at the time) going on to higher education once out of high school - and getting a very good job from it. His parents couldn't thank me enough. Even if that is the only good example of the good I am/was able to do - in Amateur Radio, then I'm satisfied. But I haven't stopped there........ I teach Amateur Radio classes when asked - and on other occasions - I've taught basic electronics - taking those folks beyond the Study Guide. It is nice to be able to "use" and "impart" that knowledge so that others can benefit. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"jawod" wrote in message ...
Cecil Moore wrote: lid wrote: It used to be that there weren't a set of questions with corresponding answers - there was a syllabus from which the questions were set. It took understanding of the syllabus to apply the formulae that had been learnt to calculate the answer. It is true that the 1950's License Manuals were not multiple choice but the exams were. The License Manuals went like this: Q: What is the unit of electrical resistance? A: The unit of electrical resistance is the ohm. The exam then had multiple choices, one of them being "ohm". It is hard to understand how anyone could develop that correct answer from first principles or formulas. I memorized the correct answer and it still exists in my memory as something I once memorized long before I ever knew there was a man named Ohm after whom the unit of electrical resistance was named. The difference between memorizing the question pool answers from the 1950's License Manuals and memorizing the question pool answers of today is just splitting hairs. I used exactly the same memorizing techniques to ace the Extra exam in 2000 as I did to pass the Conditional exam in 1953. Here here (!) Cecil, I'm happy to agree with you. Modern testing techniques are intended to be transparent. This is true for FCC exams, Postal exams, any and all government qualification exams. (And because of this, all qualifying exams in the private sector, as well.) It took a lot of litigation to get there. Government agencies had to prove that their qualifying exams were directly linked to the specific tasks required of the given position for which the individual was applying. A Postal Carrier needn't know Pythagorus' theorum to deliver the mail. I took the Postal Carrier exam 35 years ago and did not do well. I wasn't good at sorting on a timed basis. This notion of a "cheapening" of FCC requirements because the question pool is open to the public is a red herring: transparency is the rule. If you look at the question pool and study it, you will gain the necessary expertise to pass the exam. This is not cheating, nor is it short-circuiting the "REAL" ham radio "requirements" that some view as sacrosanct. I used ARRL manuals to pass the Extra Exam and I do not defer to anyone in this regard. Does this make me a ham radio genius? Not AT ALL. Man, I have SO MUCH to learn. This newsgroup is "potentially" very helpful! For that, I give thanks. You know, I love ham radio. I'm happy so many join the ranks each year. If there still is a concern out there, be an Elmer and address it. John AB8O (yeah, I changed my call) I don't know if there is actually any truth to this BUT - the dumbing down "allegedly" started back in Reagan's day or was it George Srs? - when someone here in the U.S. apparently couldn't pass the exam - and being he was in good relations with the then King of Jordan, the King of Jordan asked Reagan or Bush Sr to do something to help out. I've heard that story a few times. True or not - the tests have changed drastically. The tests really (in my opinion) aren't meant to "teach" anything or shall we say - show any "in depth proficiency". The study guides give you "just" enough to pass the exam - without going into a lot of information. You certainly can't pass a novice OR extra exam and instantly qualify yourself as an Electronics Technician. The material just isn't that in depth. For that matter, the GROL tests and accompanying manuals don't do a hell of a lot either for "teaching" - or showing "proficiency". They're merely meant to get you in the door - period. The latter is scary - considering that the GROL though diminished in need in most cases as of this point in time - IS still required in "some" cases - as a sign of "knowledge" of the subject. That is why many places that I know of, produce their own exams - designed to actually test your knowledge. One guy I know - been in 2 way radio for years, good at it, smart as a whip - took an entry exam to get a new job. Said that was the most in depth - "drilling" - organized test he ever took, considering he had his Commercial license "pre- GROL" and his amateur license. I have read articles from a leading publication in the industry that there is a move afoot to get the FCC Commercial License - some teeth put back in. Why? - Due to an increasing issue with interference and so on. Seems to me, though in some cases - the horses are already out of the barn and "maybe" too late to try to close the doors, changes "could" be made. What gets me, is that article spoke of another agency doing the testing and licensing. So - in other words - the FCC - our "RADIO" governing agency has lost its grip on this? IF the FCC can't control it, how the hell is some "private" agency? Not that it would happen, but I have to wonder just "how" they may want to try to differentiate between those with GROLs and any subsequent endorsements - of those who just read a "study guide" enough to pass - from those who have "actual" electronics schooling? As an examiner for FCC Commercial AND Amateur exams, I've seen many folks come through. You can usually pick out those who know their stuff and those who do not. You can also usually pick out those who DO know the stuff but freeze on exams. For what it is worth - at least in my experience here, most who have "schooling" do NOT usually bring any type of "study guide". I've tested whole groups of School students and not one study guide was to be seen. Same goes for those who are "comfortable" with their knowledge of Ham radio. They simply feel - if they don't know it by test time - then no sense testing. For the GROL, it is an expensive proposition if you don't know your stuff or haven't been able to grasp the study guide material. Back in the day - it was usually the cost of a LONG trip (maybe lodging too) to an FCC office, now they're more local but cost is still there - pass or fail. Come to think of it, if the current rate increases stay the same - soon - the Amateur Exams will cost almost if not as much as the GROL! They're almost half way there now - depending on which VEC/TCM you go through. Yes, it is going to be very interesting indeed to see how things progress not only in the Amateur Licensing area, but also the "Commercial" side as well - for the next few years at least. L. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"Olie" nospam@nobody wrote in message ...
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's your MENSA membership number? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp A MENSA membership means you have a high intelligence quotient. A high intelligence quotient does not necessarily mean you know anything, only that if you apply yourself that you have the ability to learn more easily than an average person. I know some very lazy MENSA members that can't even spell a large number of the words they use. In other words, even people above average intelligence can be and often are too lazy to learn. They do manage to apply what they do know better than most. Mensa - who gives a damned? Most of the "brilliant" people I've ever met - had their thumbs up their ass when it came to doing the basic things in life - they can't do them. What the hell good is a "brilliant" person if they're too stupid to know how or lazy to do "basic" things? If having a Mensa number means you're bankrupt in common sense or "lazy", I'd rather not be a member - thank you. Often, it is "common sense" which gets you through - NOT "brilliance". From all I've ever heard and /or seen - "brilliance" and "common sense" don't go hand in hand. Sitting in a chair with a bunch of books behind you to make you "appear" smart and not getting off your lazy ass to use it or to further your education - is not a "productive" person. I know a few welfare bums who fall into that description- "appear" smart, "act" smart - lazy as hell. Being in the center of a University Library with books on most any subject - is NOT going to make you any more intelligent if you don't venture to "learn". Even at that, if you don't use it, you lose it. ............. This is funny as all getout angry diatribe snipped Obviously the person claiming to be a Mensa member has poked a figurative finger into your soft spot. Sensitive, are you? Taking umbrage? Apparently you feel that the alleged Mensa member has slighted you either directly or indirectly, ergo your lengthy and uncalled-for diatribe. Of course, in your self-righteous response you probably did not consider the possibility that the "Mensa" person was a troll. Makes no difference, does it? He certainly set you off on a rant. I give him five stars for that. Sit back, read the post again and view it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. It will lower your blood pressure. Even if the guy IS a Mensa member, by the simple fact of him bragging about same shows that he is a blowgut braggart whose ego has gotten in the way of common sense. I doubt he is what he says he is, but he certainly elicited a wordy response from you. He wins. You lost. Eh, not really........... I'm "agreeing" with you as to his content. As to mine, I was basically replying to what Brenda Ann had said. He didn't hit a "soft spot". People like that - I just find very ignorant. You're right, it is funny! My exchange with him died with my last contact with him. I'm merely replying to others. AND giving my opinion about people like that. Him get to me? THAT IS FUNNY! I've had better people try. So, in that regard I'll disagree with you. He didn't budge my blood pressure - one iota. So, sorry - he gets no stars. I've just agreed to disagree with him and am agreeing with the others - YOU included (to the point mentioned). L. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's your MENSA membership number? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp A MENSA membership means you have a high intelligence quotient. A high intelligence quotient does not necessarily mean you know anything, only that if you apply yourself that you have the ability to learn more easily than an average person. I know some very lazy MENSA members that can't even spell a large number of the words they use. In other words, even people above average intelligence can be and often are too lazy to learn. They do manage to apply what they do know better than most. Mensa - who gives a damned? Most of the "brilliant" people I've ever met - had their thumbs up their ass when it came to doing the basic things in life - they can't do them. What the hell good is a "brilliant" person if they're too stupid to know how or lazy to do "basic" things? If having a Mensa number means you're bankrupt in common sense or "lazy", I'd rather not be a member - thank you. Often, it is "common sense" which gets you through - NOT "brilliance". From all I've ever heard and /or seen - "brilliance" and "common sense" don't go hand in hand. Sitting in a chair with a bunch of books behind you to make you "appear" smart and not getting off your lazy ass to use it or to further your education - is not a "productive" person. I know a few welfare bums who fall into that description- "appear" smart, "act" smart - lazy as hell. Being in the center of a University Library with books on most any subject - is NOT going to make you any more intelligent if you don't venture to "learn". Even at that, if you don't use it, you lose it. .............. This is funny as all getout angry diatribe snipped Obviously the person claiming to be a Mensa member has poked a figurative finger into your soft spot. Sensitive, are you? Taking umbrage? Apparently you feel that the alleged Mensa member has slighted you either directly or indirectly, ergo your lengthy and uncalled-for diatribe. Of course, in your self-righteous response you probably did not consider the possibility that the "Mensa" person was a troll. Makes no difference, does it? He certainly set you off on a rant. I give him five stars for that. Sit back, read the post again and view it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. It will lower your blood pressure. Even if the guy IS a Mensa member, by the simple fact of him bragging about same shows that he is a blowgut braggart whose ego has gotten in the way of common sense. I doubt he is what he says he is, but he certainly elicited a wordy response from you. He wins. You lost. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
jawod wrote:
If you are confident in your intelligence, why do you need validation? In my case, my wife's best friend's husband, who was a member of MENSA, made a bet with me that I couldn't qualify for MENSA. If I won, he would pay for the exam and my first year's dues. If I lost, I was out the cost of the exam and dinner for 4. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
L. wrote:
Mensa - who gives a damned? Some of the same people who give a damn about the definition of words. Most of the "brilliant" people I've ever met - had their thumbs up their ass when it came to doing the basic things in life - they can't do them. What the hell good is a "brilliant" person if they're too stupid to know how or lazy to do "basic" things? If having a Mensa number means you're bankrupt in common sense or "lazy", I'd rather not be a member - thank you. This is one of the best examples of sour grapes that I have ever seen. This is funny as all hell....... some shmuck "claiming" to be a "genious" coming in here and trying to make the rest of us seem inferior to him. Exactly as you are trying to use your Morse code skill to make nocode techs feel inferior to you "real hams". (Incidentally, what good is Morse code skill when one can't even spell "genius"?) No one is any better than the rest of us. Strange words from a man who has been pounding his chest because knowing Morse code makes him so superior. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
L. wrote:
I don't know if there is actually any truth to this BUT - the dumbing down "allegedly" started back in Reagan's day or was it George Srs? - when someone here in the U.S. apparently couldn't pass the exam - and being he was in good relations with the then King of Jordan, the King of Jordan asked Reagan or Bush Sr to do something to help out. I've heard that story a few times. True or not - the tests have changed drastically. If I remember correctly, the incident had nothing to do with dumbing down technical issues. It was all about the outdated Morse code testing requirement which a lot of countries have indeed dropped. The tests really (in my opinion) aren't meant to "teach" anything or shall we say - show any "in depth proficiency". Of course not. They are entrance exams, not university degrees. They're merely meant to get you in the door - period. Exactly! That is their entire purpose. They open the door to a lifetime of learning. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Olie wrote:
Obviously the person claiming to be a Mensa member has poked a figurative finger into your soft spot. Sensitive, are you? Taking umbrage? Apparently you feel that the alleged Mensa member has slighted you either directly or indirectly, ergo your lengthy and uncalled-for diatribe. Of course, in your self-righteous response you probably did not consider the possibility that the "Mensa" person was a troll. Makes no difference, does it? He certainly set you off on a rant. I give him five stars for that. My reporting my MENSA membership is usually a troll aimed at someone who feels himself to be superior to everyone else for some obscure reason, e.g. Morse code skill. Note that not only is a lack of Morse code skill belittled but MENSA membership is also belittled. In fact, any difference from the attitudes and attrubutes of the poster will be belittled. Even correct definitions of words have been belittled. Truth is, I got into MENSA because someone lost a bet and paid for my exam and dues. I am not presently a member of MENSA because the yearly dues exceed my threshold of pain. But I am a member of OOTC and FISTS, #8741. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and memorizing specific answers to specific questions. The former is called learning, and can be applied to many situations. The latter is called laziness, and teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose. I don't view testing in this regard as a form of teaching. The goal, as someone posted, is to "get in the door". What's wrong with that? Memorizing precise answers and not processes is lazy, I guess. However, following ARRL testing manuals, you HAVE to learn the processes. Deep understanding of all principles involved will gain you an educational degree. That's not the intent of FCC testing. It's a hobby! Get in the door and have fun. John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would Ham Radiodie?
wrote:
From: Steve Stone on Sat, Aug 12 2006 6:31 am Groups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.policy, rec.radio.scanner, rec.radio.swap Ham radio is gonna be flushed big time if this is all you old farts are worried about. Steve, you may be quite right! There is NO expression from these federally-authorized morsemen of amateur radio being a HOBBY. [it is a "service" to the country or something para-military...and "hobby" is not in the Rules (except by definition)] Indeed, they bristle and come unglued at the slightest negativism of their mighty endeavors of "professional amateurism" with all its rank, status, and glory. Ham radio can't be just "fun" for its own sake, an enjoyable pastime, something done for personal pleasure. No, one has to enjoy ONLY Their views, like what they like, or suffer the consequences of being considered "lower caste" on par with river-bottom slime. These mighty macho morsemen demand OBEDIANCE to their views and opinions, are quick to call disbelievers any name they choose, always denigrative, condescending, with heavy overtones of attempted humiliation. They are the unforgiving in regards to anyone NOT worshiping their status, rank, titles in amateurism. Unforgiving to the point of attacking ANYONE against them. They RULE. [they think...but only in here...] While these mighty macho morsemen take out their frustrations, resentments, anger against all not idolizing their opinions, there are some actual amateur radio issues which need addressing. The removal or continuation of the morse code test for US amateur radio license testing is still in limbo; official Comment period on the NPRM was over late last year. Access BPL recently had a rules revision/addendum added by the FCC with a Report and Order released on 7 August 2006. No one in here apparently cares about it since the "ARRL is on the job," "fighting" to keep HF "safe" (for their membership?). [ho, ho, some "fight"...] No one cares to discuss two BIG issues. Everyone is busy, busy, trying to insult anyone who doesn't subscribe to Their views. Ain't no "discussion" here, hasn't been for years. Internecine personal warfare is the order of the day. Everyone in here either obeys the rulings of Big Brother in Newington or they are considered lower forms of (barely) life. The number of US amateur radio licensees is slowly dropping (expirations greater than new licensees to the tune of 10K in three years). Membership in the ARRL (the "representative" of all, according to them) has never been more than a quarter of all US licensees. Technician class licensees are very very close to being a full half of all classes (49.07% of all individual licensees as of 12 Aug 06). Lettuce all bow our heads and worship morsemanship...these are the salad days of the brass-pounders. Morse is the answer to everything I'm told. [over and over again] :-) Beep, beep... JOIN us. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
an old friend wrote:
Al Klein wrote: On 12 Aug 2006 10:10:55 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: at some level all you can do a merorize The discussion isn't about WHETHER you memorize, it's about WHAT you memorize. that is a chnge in tune oncce you accpet that much of the testing involves memizztion the question then comes down to where is your beef? if it is that today we then to use multiguess questions pools verus short answer of bygone day you likely out of luck the extra cost is not going to be supported within the present system I agree short answer would be an improvement over multible guess but teks you issue up with other don't imply that the ams that have taken and passed the required tetst have not done what is required you tread awfully close to libel there AL ask an lawyer if you don't believe me I am sorry, but do you type with your feet? Anyway,, Back in the old days, we used to walk 5 miles in the snow to the FCC field office to take our exams. We had to kneel on radiators while we took the test. We used slide rules and crayons AND WE LIKED IT!!! Then we'd wait 3 years to receive our license which gave us time to teach electrons to enter and exit all the tubes...stupid little buggers, those. Boy, those were the days. When a ham was a ham, brass was for pounding and AM signals were as wide as the day is long. These "young" whippersnappers get off too easy. I say, rank priveleges on the basis of how big an RF burn you can take, or on the basis of personal weight. I may have said it befo take the FCC out of it completely and go with the FDA. Those boys know how to grade. (Too much tea this morning!) John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
jawod wrote: an old friend wrote: Al Klein wrote: On 12 Aug 2006 10:10:55 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: you tread awfully close to libel there AL ask an lawyer if you don't believe me I am sorry, but do you type with your feet? Anyway,, Back in the old days, we used to walk 5 miles in the snow to the FCC field office to take our exams. We had to kneel on radiators while we took the test. We used slide rules and crayons AND WE LIKED IT!!! Then we'd wait 3 years to receive our license which gave us time to teach electrons to enter and exit all the tubes...stupid little buggers, those. Boy, those were the days. When a ham was a ham, brass was for pounding and AM signals were as wide as the day is long. These "young" whippersnappers get off too easy. I say, rank priveleges on the basis of how big an RF burn you can take, or on the basis of personal weight. I may have said it befo take the FCC out of it completely and go with the FDA. Those boys know how to grade. (Too much tea this morning!) I avoid answering question from that admit to using too much of any drug legal or or not John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Cecil Moore wrote:
jawod wrote: If you are confident in your intelligence, why do you need validation? In my case, my wife's best friend's husband, who was a member of MENSA, made a bet with me that I couldn't qualify for MENSA. If I won, he would pay for the exam and my first year's dues. If I lost, I was out the cost of the exam and dinner for 4. I suppose you two argue over who has the lower number and how much harder it USED to be to get into MENSA. :) |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Olie wrote:
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's your MENSA membership number? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp A MENSA membership means you have a high intelligence quotient. A high intelligence quotient does not necessarily mean you know anything, only that if you apply yourself that you have the ability to learn more easily than an average person. I know some very lazy MENSA members that can't even spell a large number of the words they use. In other words, even people above average intelligence can be and often are too lazy to learn. They do manage to apply what they do know better than most. Mensa - who gives a damned? Most of the "brilliant" people I've ever met - had their thumbs up their ass when it came to doing the basic things in life - they can't do them. What the hell good is a "brilliant" person if they're too stupid to know how or lazy to do "basic" things? If having a Mensa number means you're bankrupt in common sense or "lazy", I'd rather not be a member - thank you. Often, it is "common sense" which gets you through - NOT "brilliance". From all I've ever heard and /or seen - "brilliance" and "common sense" don't go hand in hand. Sitting in a chair with a bunch of books behind you to make you "appear" smart and not getting off your lazy ass to use it or to further your education - is not a "productive" person. I know a few welfare bums who fall into that description- "appear" smart, "act" smart - lazy as hell. Being in the center of a University Library with books on most any subject - is NOT going to make you any more intelligent if you don't venture to "learn". Even at that, if you don't use it, you lose it. ............. This is funny as all getout angry diatribe snipped Obviously the person claiming to be a Mensa member has poked a figurative finger into your soft spot. Sensitive, are you? Taking umbrage? Apparently you feel that the alleged Mensa member has slighted you either directly or indirectly, ergo your lengthy and uncalled-for diatribe. Of course, in your self-righteous response you probably did not consider the possibility that the "Mensa" person was a troll. Makes no difference, does it? He certainly set you off on a rant. I give him five stars for that. Sit back, read the post again and view it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. It will lower your blood pressure. Even if the guy IS a Mensa member, by the simple fact of him bragging about same shows that he is a blowgut braggart whose ego has gotten in the way of common sense. I doubt he is what he says he is, but he certainly elicited a wordy response from you. He wins. You lost. If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. If someone wants to use MENSA to elevate themselves above the rest, they are perched on very rickety stilts. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
jawod wrote:
If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. That was the whole point. -- 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 om... Truth is, I got into MENSA because someone lost a bet and paid for my exam and dues. I am not presently a member of MENSA because the yearly dues exceed my threshold of pain. But I am a member of OOTC and FISTS, #8741. :-) Question (this is not a flame):. 1. Is the ability to decode Morse Code transmissions, in one's own wet modem (brain), at high speed, proportional or even relevant in any possible way to one's ability to pass a mensa test and be accepted for membership? Is mensa membership useful? Is mensa membership a measure of Morse wet modem throughput? Cecil, I think you already answered all of the above as 'no'. That doesn't mean I like the the brand of motorcycle you drive. I do not. I like BMW's that don't require a toolkit for every 100 miles on the road. 2. Or, (as I suspect), is Morse ability only useful after you have purchased one's HF equipment, now that one has passed the test (whose investment you otherwise would not have made until you passed the trivial but compulsory 5wpm test for Morse code proficiency) to have to have fun and prevent future alien attacks? I am an extra class op who passed 13 wpm several years ago, can do 25 wpm now and getting better all the time just because of heavy (and fun) Morse action on the cw sub-bands, and wanting to know what people are saying and being able to communicate back; in fact, CW is almost as good as psk31. 3. Just the same, how much does this mensa thing cost? Is it worth a dinner for 4? |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Rusty Shackleford wrote:
1. Is the ability to decode Morse Code transmissions, in one's own wet modem (brain), at high speed, proportional or even relevant in any possible way to one's ability to pass a mensa test and be accepted for membership? Is mensa membership useful? Is mensa membership a measure of Morse wet modem throughput? Rusty, let me answer you this way. In my humble opinion, a MENSA level IQ is worth magnitudes more to its possessor than is Morse code skill even within the Amateur Radio Service. If all the coded hams with IQ's less than 100 were transformed into nocode techs with MENSA level IQ's, the ARS would be much better off and a lot less prone to silliness. The ARRL might even stop publishing those gross technical errors, e.g. reflections don't exist. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
I wish everybody here would use their MENSA and take this thread and the
other non swap related garbage out of rec.radio.swap. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Rusty Shackleford wrote: 1. Is the ability to decode Morse Code transmissions, in one's own wet modem (brain), at high speed, proportional or even relevant in any possible way to one's ability to pass a mensa test and be accepted for membership? Is mensa membership useful? Is mensa membership a measure of Morse wet modem throughput? Rusty, let me answer you this way. In my humble opinion, a MENSA level IQ is worth magnitudes more to its possessor than is Morse code skill even within the Amateur Radio Service. If all the coded hams with IQ's less than 100 were transformed into nocode techs with MENSA level IQ's, the ARS would be much better off and a lot less prone to silliness. The ARRL might even stop publishing those gross technical errors, e.g. reflections don't exist. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
David 01 wrote: I wish everybody here would use their MENSA and take this thread and the other non swap related garbage out of rec.radio.swap. either use your ignore thread comnad if you don't have one just try not reading it |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
David 01 wrote: I wish everybody here would use their MENSA and take this thread and the other non swap related garbage out of rec.radio.swap. either use your ignore thread comnad if you don't have one just try not reading it |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"jawod" wrote in message ...
In the example YOU give - Cecil - it could be taken either way. In the case of the "frequencies" you're to operate on for a given license and band - YES - you could simply "memorize" (not really commit to memory) those frequencies - for the exam purposes and just refer to a chart from there in. OR you COULD "memorize" them (actually committing to memory) for the purpose of NOT having to use a chart! However, once you use those frequencies after a while - especially if active - then you "would" tend to "memorize" (for life) those frequencies. Yes, it is definately splitting hairs! L. that makes no sense. to memorize is to commit to memory, by definition. RE-READ IT - there were TWO people here in the beginning "splitting hairs" about the use of or perhaps MIS use of the word "memorization. One was leaning towards "memorizing" "ANSWERS" purely to satisfy an exam....... i.e; ABCD.......... it isn't quite that simple. On the other hand, the other argument was in the "true" sense of the word - TO MEMORIZE (commit to memory for life). |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
L. wrote: "jawod" wrote in message ... RE-READ IT - there were TWO people here in the beginning "splitting hairs" about the use of or perhaps MIS use of the word "memorization. One was leaning towards "memorizing" "ANSWERS" purely to satisfy an exam....... i.e; ABCD.......... it isn't quite that simple. On the other hand, the other argument was in the "true" sense of the word - TO MEMORIZE (commit to memory for life). what it has been about is that couple of folks want to make out that somehow the NoCodeTechs are some how doing something altogether different from what has been done for years |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t... jawod wrote: If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. That was the whole point. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Let me set something straight. "I" was NOT beating my chest about "CODE". I was only in the argument with regard to the use/misuse of the word "Memorization". "I" think code has its place - but not as it once did. It sure isn't keeping the bands clean by keeping it in place. "I" don't use code - that often. I think also, it "can" be fun to learn for those who may want to try it. Some people may - as has been proven, still - others won't - which also has been proven. THAT IS MY stance on code. As to the "mis"spelling of "genius", hey - what can I say - I'm human, I DO make mistakes. I don't rely on "spell check" techniques - so ............ an error does tend to sneak through from time to time. It doesn't matter one iota to me if you do code or not. "I" surely am not here to pass judgement on you or anyone else by that ability or inability (since some DO have trouble getting it). OR lack of interest "may" be more specific. I have quite a few people I talk to on the bands who are "NO CODE Techs. They're not interested in the code - OR wanting to climb any higher in license class. Its cool with me....... That is their thing - not mine. It sure doesn't mean we can't have a decent conversation - be it on the air via repeater, simplex, computer mode or face to face. :) L. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
L. wrote: "Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... jawod wrote: If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. That was the whole point. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Let me set something straight. "I" was NOT beating my chest about "CODE you are however enging a deabte flaming people on side of the map that tend to get you "counter battery fire sir face it or not as you choose |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
a MENSA
level IQ is worth magnitudes more to its possessor than is Morse code skill even within the Amateur Radio Service. If all the coded hams with IQ's less than 100 were transformed into nocode techs with MENSA level IQ's, the ARS would be much better off and a lot less prone to silliness. The ARRL might even stop publishing those gross technical errors, e.g. reflections don't exist. Cecil you're trolling, aren't you? If you truly believe this stuff, you're in sadder shape than I thought. Your MENSA membership is dreck, dribble, dross. With code, there is, at least, some grounding in practicality: a real world function. "Whew! I knew I was a genius but now I have PROOF!" How completely sad. MENSA has perverted the very nature of IQ in a manner not dissimilar to the way Home Owner Associations have perverted the notion of individual freedoms (guaranteed by our Constitution). Enjoy your little trophy but I'm sure you'll keep yourself insulated from the derision you richly deserve when you bring it up in this newsgroup. I can tell that you're not a bad guy...but, the mensa thing makes you seem, I don't know, ...(fill in the blank) Be Good. Hell, be more egalitarian for once in your life! We all share a HOBBY!!!! John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 12 Aug 2006 15:42:50 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: oncce you accpet that much of the testing involves memizztion the question then comes down to where is your beef? Those who memorize answers instead of learning concepts - what you would have seen at the beginning of the thread had you paid attention. you tread awfully close to libel there AL Look up the definition of "libel". Part of it is "malicious defamation". Calling a penny a cent isn't malicious, nor is it defamatory. ask an lawyer if you don't believe me You need to take your own advice. Also you need to ask an English teacher - you don't seem to know the definitions of a lot of very common words. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 12 Aug 2006 15:43:51 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: Al Klein wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 14:41:33 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Brenda Ann wrote: There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and memorizing specific answers to specific questions. The former is called learning, and can be applied to many situations. The latter is called laziness, and teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose. That is just hair-splitting. The same hair splitting as the difference between stealing money and earning it - they're both methods of obtaining it. again you tread close to libel and flatout insaity There's nothing either malicious not defamatory in that. ("Who" am I defaming? "Hair"?) 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. and again Telling you something true about yourself isn't actionable, unless done with certain intent, which you'd be hard-pressed to prove. |
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?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:10:00 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:09:02 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Why don't you stay out of discussions you don't understand? We know you're a fool, why keep proving it? Read Samuel Clemens, at least. why don't you stay out of discussions that show so as aold fool not honest enough he blowing smoke Parroting what I say doesn't make you look educated. you are arguing over a difference that does not exist certain not as a some sharp line In your mind. http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ The fact that you posted something on your blog doesn't make it definitive, or even correct. |
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?
|
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?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:51:28 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: I am too lazy I think that says it all. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com