"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Morse code is uniquely necessary. (snip)


Saying so doesn't make it true, Dee. Within the goals and purposes of the
Amateur Radio Service, and to justify a unique testing requirement, how is
Morse code uniquely necessary today? Do remember recreational use is not
sufficient enough to justify a unique testing requirement (recreational use
is equally applicable to all modes and they don't have a unique testing
requirement).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Morse code is uniquely necessary. (snip)


Saying so doesn't make it true, Dee. Within the goals and purposes of
the
Amateur Radio Service, and to justify a unique testing requirement, how is
Morse code uniquely necessary today? Do remember recreational use is not
sufficient enough to justify a unique testing requirement (recreational
use
is equally applicable to all modes and they don't have a unique testing
requirement).


Well Dwight saying it isn't doesn't make that true either Dwight. I speak
from personal experience. How much HF experience have you had? How much
weak signal VHF experience have you had? Again keep in mind that I have
said Morse is necessary. While I happen to believe that testing should be
maintained that is NOT the point I am debating at this time and you keep
trying to drag it back to testing. I am stating that Morse code itself is
necessary.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
news

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Morse code is uniquely necessary. (snip)


Saying so doesn't make it true, Dee. Within the goals and purposes
of the
Amateur Radio Service, and to justify a unique testing requirement,
how is Morse code uniquely necessary today? Do remember recreational
use is not sufficient enough to justify a unique testing requirement
(recreational use is equally applicable to all modes and they don't
have a unique testing requirement).


Well Dwight saying it isn't doesn't make that true either Dwight. I
speak from personal experience. How much HF experience have you had?
How much weak signal VHF experience have you had? Again keep in mind
that I have said Morse is necessary. While I happen to believe that
testing should be maintained that is NOT the point I am debating at
this time and you keep trying to drag it back to testing. I am stating
that Morse code itself is necessary.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



I don't know about Dwight, but I use HF a lot, and I have done weak signal
work on VHF in the past. For the former I have never found CW to be
necessary, as it has never been necessary that I make any particular QSO.
As for the latter, I have never even heard any CW above 30 MHz, except
repeater IDs! This includes VHF contests. You may be using it, but I guess
I can't hear your sigs.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

(snip) Again keep in mind that I have said
Morse is necessary. While I happen to
believe that testing should be maintained that
is NOT the point I am debating at this time
and you keep trying to drag it back to testing.
I am stating that Morse code itself is necessary.


We wouldn't be having this discussion if it were not for the code testing
debate, Dee. That is why this mode is being discussed as opposed to some
other mode or discussions about the weather. I've acknowledged that Morse
code is enjoyable, entertaining, useful, and perhaps even necessary for you
to make some of the contacts you want to make. But we're not just talking
about you or the contacts you want to make. Your communications are
recreational or avocational in nature, not a necessity. And, as long as your
communications are not necessary, your use of Morse code in those
communications is not necessary.

This brings us back to the code testing debate. If Morse code is not
necessary to meet the goals and purposes of the Amateur Radio Service today,
Morse code testing should be eliminated. The _use_ of Morse code not an
issue here. You will still be able to use that mode when you find it
necessary to make the contacts you want. Others will still be able to learn
code if they want. But the test itself, as a license requirement, should
end.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

(snip) Again keep in mind that I have said
Morse is necessary. While I happen to
believe that testing should be maintained that
is NOT the point I am debating at this time
and you keep trying to drag it back to testing.
I am stating that Morse code itself is necessary.


We wouldn't be having this discussion if it were not for the code testing
debate, Dee. That is why this mode is being discussed as opposed to some
other mode or discussions about the weather. I've acknowledged that Morse
code is enjoyable, entertaining, useful, and perhaps even necessary for you
to make some of the contacts you want to make. But we're not just talking
about you or the contacts you want to make. Your communications are
recreational or avocational in nature, not a necessity. And, as long as your
communications are not necessary, your use of Morse code in those
communications is not necessary.

Dwight, amateur radio is a SERVICE...to the nation in times of need
and "everyone knows" that ONLY morse code can get through when
nothing else can, ergo it is "necessary" to have it. That's why all the
other public safety and distress-emergency communications users and
providers still use morse code.

This brings us back to the code testing debate. If Morse code is not
necessary to meet the goals and purposes of the Amateur Radio Service today,
Morse code testing should be eliminated. The _use_ of Morse code not an
issue here. You will still be able to use that mode when you find it
necessary to make the contacts you want. Others will still be able to learn
code if they want. But the test itself, as a license requirement, should
end.

The TEST and the USE cannot be separated, Dwight. It is "necessary"
to keep the test forever and ever so that there will be this "pool of
trained operators (in CW)" to help earth survive on the next invasion
of spacefaring aliens.

:-)

LHA

"Len Over 21" wrote:

(snip) The TEST and the USE cannot be
separated, Dwight. It is "necessary" to keep
the test forever and ever so that there will be
this "pool of trained operators (in CW)" to
help earth survive on the next invasion of
spacefaring aliens.


LOL. Those darn aliens have had their eyes on Earth for some time now.
Luckily, CW keeps us well prepared for any stunt they might try. I've even
heard of a secret Air Force project to study the effects of CW on captured
aliens. ;-)


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote:

(snip) The TEST and the USE cannot be
separated, Dwight. It is "necessary" to keep
the test forever and ever so that there will be
this "pool of trained operators (in CW)" to
help earth survive on the next invasion of
spacefaring aliens.

LOL. Those darn aliens have had their eyes on Earth for some time now.
Luckily, CW keeps us well prepared for any stunt they might try. I've even
heard of a secret Air Force project to study the effects of CW on captured
aliens. ;-)

...probably at "Area 51." :-)

I just hope everyone in "the pool" can stand all the chlorine necessary
to keep it sanitary... :-)

For anyone wanting serious thinking (a novel concept in here), there's
always Brooks AFB in San Antonio, the USAF School of Aerospace
Medicine. So far, the folks at Brooks haven't touched on aliens, not
even the green-card types.

LHA