Sure can Clint. And you just made my point.

Dan/W4NTI



And what point would THAT be? the hams that did this were legally
licensed, had been for some time, and passed at least 13 wmp code
tests. So much for the "yahoo filter" theory.

Clint

--
"All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly
as often as necessary. In no case would it have been possible, once
the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place...

....it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece
of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing
with had no connection with anything in the real world, not even the
kind of connection that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just
as much a fantasy in thier original version as in thier rectified version."

- The totalitarian world of George Orwell's 1984
(or is it the slander & lie campaign strategy of
today's liberals???)

--
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...

"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message
...


The new requirements *probably* will have no Morse code requirements,
ergo Morse is not really relevant to this thread.


They may or may not; if the FCC decides that no "no further change in
the
license structure is required at this time" then of course that will be
the
final
word on *that* matter, and we'll accept it and go on since they are the
ones that have the final say. I just couldn't help but notice how
certain
ones
in here I think have such an overpowering agenda regarding the CW
part of the testing that it tends to take them over and govern, or at
least
seriously influence, everything they have to remark about in ham radio.

I'm a general class operator; I realize by definition that means I had
to
show knowledge in certain areas to prove I deserved recieving the next
higher license class than tech-plus; however, I did not demonstrate
enough
skill and knowledge to warrant recieving the advanced class license.
Therefore,
advanced class operators *should* know more than I do, or at least as
much.

That brings us to the sad truth that if an *extra* class license
operator
doesn't
know how to calculate the length of a walf wave dipole on 40m (or
whatever
frequency), that is a serious issue. I say that because calculating the
length of
an antenna, especially a halfwave dipole of ALL things, is and always
WILL
be so basic to ham radio that it should be on page one of chapter one of
every study guide ever printed. Such matters is why I put such a strong
emphasis on putting more priority on written testing than that of the
skills
of
translating a CW transmission.

Sad thing is, most the time I get on 75 meters and begin discussing ham
radio
tech stuff, there is usually one heckler that harangues you about it and
makes
light of the fact that you were talking about ham radio stuff and not
what
the
weather was like on a day 58 years ago while an old man sat on a porch
and peeled potatoes in the hot summer sun... true story. I actually was
on
the
airwaves a few weeks ago discussing the pros and cons how how to set up
a new 75 meter inverted V I was going to make at home... and as soon as
I finished the conversation with the other ham and he went off the air,
a
couple
of hams got in there and began talking to one another BASHING me for
doing
so... can you imagine???

Clint