On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:19:04 -0700, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.

That's needlessly insulting.

No, it's a statement of historic fact, as determined by the licensing
authorities. But it's incorrct -- anyone who can't copy 5 wpm deserves a
license, but it's Citizen's Band.

A further valid statement would be that anyone with an IQ approaching 100 can
learn to copy 5 wpm. That's less than one character every two seconds, which
gives tons of time to recognize and write the single character before the next
one begins. Dyslexia cannot apply, unless it is dyslexia that affects the
remembered dot/dash pattern of a single character.

-- Larry

pltrgyst wrote:
No, it's a statement of historic fact, as determined by the licensing
authorities. But it's incorrct -- anyone who can't copy 5 wpm deserves a
license, but it's Citizen's Band.

Are you saying that hundreds of thousands of no-code
techs didn't deserve an amateur radio license?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave wrote:
5 WPM is do-able! My 4 1/2 year granddaughter copies 5 wpm! Her 10 year old
brother, who learned it in Cub Scouts, taught her. And, she can't even spell
yet! But, she knows the alphabet from watching TV.

Some people have DIFFICULTY learning Morse Code, real difficulty!

I have taught Morse Code off and on for 40 years and from total ignorance to
100% success in 8 hours, 2 hours a week for 4 weeks [plus a little home
practice. It is practice [work] that makes it successful.]

bulls**** or I'd would have a noivice license rough 3 decades ago

Some people can learn the code but suffer from "TEST STRESS". They can copy it
comfortably in their home or their surroundings; but, when they have to
demonstrate that skill in front of a 'WITNESS' who has pass/fail power, they
tense up and fail. That's understandable and can be worked with.

never could do it alone with any reliablity either

Some people are dyslexic. But, they can hear it and talk it out, but can't get
it on paper. But, they learned the code.
some dyslexics can true

If you can learn the english alphabet, if you can learn the english language, if
you can read this email then you CAN LEARN Morse Code at 5 WPM. You may never
progress to 20 wpm [It took me 24 months at 1 hour of practice a day every day
to progress from 5 to 20 wpm] but 5 wpm can be learned.
shove you insistance that you can speak for eveyone where the sun don't
shine

Teaching methods, practice criteria and testing/verification methods become
critical for those with difficulty.
indeed as do factors like random chance

/s/ DD, W1MCE
now even if you are right why should somebody be made to take this test
after Icould endure 10 lashes in a public sqare too (and thatwould
certainly be easier)

Poor Markie, so bitter that kids can pass morse code tests and he is
too stupid to pass one.

jesus, let's just do away with the written test *and* the CW test. let's
just open the doors to anyone. we'll set up a webpage at the ARRL site, and
you'll just point and click. it will be as easy as becoming a Reverend.

you could license your dog, a terrorist, anyone.

honestly, i am very glad there are minimum requirements. this keeps out
people who are not serious about the hobby. people who don't know what they
are doing should not be transmitting (esp on HF).

this whole CW debate is what we call the dumbing down of America.

i mean we have minimum standards for driving in America or becoming a
citizen, why is ham radio so different?

Gravity

"Dave" wrote in message
. ..
I'll top post again for brevity and getting to the point.

I like CW! It is most likely going away as a requirement. I'm sad at this.

Amateur radio will change as a result. Everything changes. Hopefully the
changes
will be positive.


i have an idea. get rid of the CW and triple the difficulty of the written
test. there is certain element of society, which needs to be kept out of
the HF spectrum.

Gravity

Dave wrote:

5 WPM is do-able! My 4 1/2 year granddaughter copies 5 wpm! Her 10 year
old brother, who learned it in Cub Scouts, taught her. And, she can't
even spell yet! But, she knows the alphabet from watching TV.

Some people have DIFFICULTY learning Morse Code, real difficulty!

MAJOR SNIPPING from here down.

gravity wrote:
i mean we have minimum standards for driving in America or becoming a
citizen, why is ham radio so different?

When I got my driver's license in 1952, the driving test
was required to be taken on a stick shift vehicle. Do
you think that should still be a requirement?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

gravity wrote:
i have an idea. get rid of the CW and triple the difficulty of the written
test. there is certain element of society, which needs to be kept out of
the HF spectrum.

How about just requiring a scientific/technical
degree from an accredited university?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

SNIPPED

Poor Markie, so bitter that kids can pass morse code tests and he is
too stupid to pass one.


NO! Don't label another person! It is wrong to label! Particularly when you do
not know any of his/her life's circumstances.

I said some people have difficulty learning or learning one particular subject.

It is reported that Albert Einstein had difficulty learning Calculus. The man
was a Physics genius but needed help with advanced math.

I hold a degree in engineering and have completed four years of seminary, but I
have not been able to learn conversational SPANISH. [About two years after
ordination the Cardinal requested that I learn Spanish at the seminary . After
two months the instructor approved my withdrawal from the class. I could learn
vocabulary, how to read, write and the grammar for spanish, but my ear does not
hear spanish. Total immersion in a Spanish speaking community would be the way
for me to learn.]

I still say, anyone who can learn an/the alphabet can learn Morse Code. For
those with difficulty, the solution to the issue is teaching METHODs not the
student's difficulty. Any alphabet is recognizing sound patterns. Words are
simply combinations of sound patterns.

For 'an_old_friend' I would begin by teaching an alphabet of SOUND PATTERNS. No
requirement for speed. Just focus on sound patterns. Keep it very simple. Each
two hour lesson would focus on no more than 7 letters until well heard. Then
move to SOUND PATTERNS that are close to or similar to those [s]he has learned
and is mastering. [Example: learn the sound patterns for 'A', 'W', and 'J'
repeat until they are instantly recognized. Then move on to 'N' 'D', 'B', etc.
Don't count 'dots' or 'dashes' but hear sound patterns.]

The next two hour session, one week later, would begin with a review then add
'T, M, O' followed by 'E, I, S, H'. Drill sound patterns. Then end the session
by sending simple words using the 1/2 of the alphabet that has been studied.
Speed is NOT a requirement! Accuracy is! If Farnsworth timing at 18 wpm is a
roadblock, then change practice timing to 13 wpm or 10 wpm or 7 1/2 wpm or 5 wpm
or 3 wpm. SPEED is NOT a REQUIREMENT! Accuracy is!

The next two weeks complete the alphabet. Week five would include the numbers
and common punctuation. [5 sound character patterns and 6 sound character patterns].

Having said all this, my defense of CW is not any legal requirement. It is
simply the best way to work rare DX. Much less power required. Much less
bandwidth required. Much more discernible [copyable] in a pile. And, it is fun!

/s/ DD, W1MCE

It is reported that Albert Einstein had difficulty learning Calculus. The
man
was a Physics genius but needed help with advanced math.

it was differential geometry that Einstein was unfamiliar with. when
formulating relativity, he realized that he needed tools that he was not
familiar with. so he went to a mathematician friend and learned which tools
he needed.

please understand this in the context of 1912. differential geometry was
fairly new back then, i believe it came from Riemann.

it's possible for some branches of math and physics to be relatively arcane.
for instance, de Borges attempted proofs use operator theory. most
mathematics students cannot read his papers. in fact, most professional
mathematicians can't read them either. the only reason that de Borges proof
of Bieberbach became accepted is that it was rewritten by other Europeans.

it's not uncommon for a theoretical physicist to have to learn a new branch
of math to solve a problem. for instance, string theorists working on the
landscape turned to statistics.

Gravity

Dave wrote:
SNIPPED

Poor Markie, so bitter that kids can pass morse code tests and he is
too stupid to pass one.


NO! Don't label another person! It is wrong to label! Particularly when you do
not know any of his/her life's circumstances.
Wismen labels everybody except himself of course

I still say, anyone who can learn an/the alphabet can learn Morse Code. For
those with difficulty, the solution to the issue is teaching METHODs not the
student's difficulty. Any alphabet is recognizing sound patterns. Words are
simply combinations of sound patterns.

For 'an_old_friend' I would begin by teaching an alphabet of SOUND PATTERNS. No
requirement for speed. Just focus on sound patterns. Keep it very simple. Each
two hour lesson would focus on no more than 7 letters until well heard. Then
move to SOUND PATTERNS that are close to or similar to those [s]he has learned
and is mastering. [Example: learn the sound patterns for 'A', 'W', and 'J'
repeat until they are instantly recognized. Then move on to 'N' 'D', 'B', etc.
Don't count 'dots' or 'dashes' but hear sound patterns.]
prehaps you are trying to be helpfull

you are coming off insulting and condesnding
that metodalogy was tried and my ears lose the older set of patterns
in a few day before I get a hold of the next set


Having said all this, my defense of CW is not any legal requirement. It is
simply the best way to work rare DX. Much less power required. Much less
bandwidth required. Much more discernible [copyable] in a pile. And, it is fun!

fun for you the migraine headaches I get listening to any of it is not
fun none enjoys pain on that level

yes I might be ableto learn well enough now with only a receive or
tranmited test (and if I were going to try it would be to send) so I
don't have to listen to it

you have fun with fine go for it
Bear in mind I think Mose and esp the attiudes around are bad for the
ARS but I support your freedom to disagree and even to just do
something I consider nonproducitve just for sheer joy of it

I expect the same however for myself

/s/ DD, W1MCE