In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Jimmie has opinions about everything.

What's wrong with having opinions and expressing them?

Whatt's wrong with knowing facts and stating them?

Each and every one of them
is write and "right." Anyone who disagrees is always "wrong."

That's how *Len* behaves.

You've hosed this one up too, Leonard. Anyone who is wrong is wrong.
That isn't to say that the individual is always wrong. If he is wrong
on another occasion, it will no doubt be pointed out.

Foghorn Lenhorn makes statement of fact. All too often his statements
are flat out wrong.

We've seen Len behave like this many times before, Dave. He simply cannot
tolerate having his mistakes and errors pointed out by someone he considers
inferior - such as me.

It is an upside down world in which a ham, posting in an amateur radio
newsgroup is considered inferior by a non-ham who hangs out here for
reasons known only to himself.

Len has stated that his mission is to eliminate the Morse Code test. Yet he
goes off on all kinds of subjects that have nothing to do with the Morse Code
test.

It's a plain, simple fact that we got code waivers because JY1 (better
known as
King Hussein of Jordan) asked then-president George Bush to do something
about
US code test requirements for hams. GB1 told FCC to do something, and we
got medical waivers.

It wasn't because of ADA, or Handi-Hams, or anything like that.

Leonard isn't about to allow facts to stand in his way.

Of course not. Never mind that the above facts came from someone who worked for
FCC and who explained the whole process.

Len never worked for FCC.

For some reason, Len doesn't like having that sort of thing pointed out.

I'd say the reason is that he looks foolish when he attempts to
pontificate on something he knows little about.

Perhaps. Or perhaps he is very threatened and afraid of being shown to be wrong
about something, because if he admits a mistake in one area, he might also be
mistaken in another area.

Even worse, Len might have to deal with the idea that different people have
different opinions, and that others are not wrong or inferior because they
disagree with him.

For example, it is my opinion that Morse Code testing for an amateur radio
license should continue and be expanded. It is Len's opinion that Morse Code
testing for an amateur radio license should be competely discontinued.

Both opinions have supporting arguments behind them. Ultimately, though, it all
comes down to which arguments are considered most significant - which is just
another way of defining an opinion.

He's probably also ticked about being proved wrong on his "subdivision was
only
possible because of modern frequency synthesizer" statement. Apparently,
Len
cannot conceive of the concept of being allowed to operate anywhere within
a
given band of frequencies, and of not having to know one's exact QRG within
a
few Hz - only that one's transmitted signal is inside the band.

Len is accustomed to using spot frequency channels. The way most
amateur radio operation takes place is outside his field of reference.

Exactly. It appears that he wants/needs for Amateur Radio to conform to those
radio services he has some experience in, such as citizens band and GMRS/FRS.

The *freedom* with which hams operate is obviously very threatening to Len.

Note also that the subject under discussion was the ability of hams to stay
within their bands and subbands, not the ability to dial up a specific QRG. Yet
Len tries to push the discussion away from the subject.

Back about 1961, there was an article by W1ICP in QST showing how to build
a
100/50 kHz frequency standard. 6AU6 oscillator, 12AU7 multivibrator (which
today we'd call a flipflop). It was a "Beginner and Novice" article....

All a ham needed was something like that to know where the band and
subband
edges were.

But Len just doesn't get it.

In 1961, when that article was written, all US amateur HF bands and subbands
were on multiples of 100 or 50 kHz. (160 is MF not HF). Thus, the need for a
divider. When incentive licensing was enacted, some subband edges were on
multiples of 25 kHz, requiring another multivibrator. But by that time, IC
dividers were common enough that a simple 100/50/25 kHz standard could be made
from a couple of ICs.

No synthesizer needed at all.

...because it places the situation outside his "Frequency synthesizers
began appearing in many radio services...." pontification. His status
(the one he doesn't need or want) as expert is invalidated.

I'm sure there are areas of knowledge where Len is an expert. Amateur radio is
not one of them.

73 de Jim, N2EY