Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 7th 03, 04:13 AM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

FEELING that something is true or false
doesn't make it so. You have made an
assertion that you claim to be fact
therefore it IS up to you, even in a casual
discussion to back it up with data. (snip)



Nonsense. I've never seen anybody asked to provide statistical data in a
casual discussion.


Unless you have statistical data on this,
your statement is an OPINION and
nothing more.



No kidding!!! Isn't that exactly what I've been saying all along?

Lacking
any evidence either way, it is my opinion that it is fact.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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


You are being deliberately obtuse. Your opinion that it is a fact does not
make it so. And even in casual discussions, I've seen many statements
challenged and the proponent asked to prove it.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

  #2   Report Post  
Old December 7th 03, 06:34 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

You are being deliberately obtuse. Your opinion
that it is a fact does not make it so.



And you're being deliberately disputatious. I've never said it did make it
so.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

  #3   Report Post  
Old December 7th 03, 05:13 PM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

You are being deliberately obtuse. Your opinion
that it is a fact does not make it so.



And you're being deliberately disputatious. I've never said it did make

it
so.


The phrasing used in your posts attempt to make it so. Thus naturally I will
dispute the contention that you are trying to make it a fact without any
supporting data. Not only are you trying to call it a fact but attempting
to make others believe it, again without supporting data.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

  #4   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 09:55 AM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

The phrasing used in your posts
attempt to make it so. Thus naturally
I will dispute the contention that you
are trying to make it a fact without
any supporting data. Not only are
you trying to call it a fact but attempting
to make others believe it, again
without supporting data.



You're not going to let it go, are you, Dee? I said what I believe to be
fact. Lacking any real data, that is all I could possibly do.

I based that on the fact that Morse code has been widely featured in
movies (Titantic to War Movies), television (Hogan's Heros to Westerns to
Sci-Fi), books, children's toys, the military decades ago, youth
organizations, and so on. So, again, I do think it is a fact that most
people in this country today know about Morse code. They may not know what
it's called, how to do it, or whatever, but only a truly isolated person
would not know at least something about it. That is especially true for
anyone interested in radio (shortwave listeners, potential new hams, and so
on).

You haven't provided anything beyond your own opinion to dispute any of
that. Instead, you assault my choice of words and then insist, even if true,
that is not enough - that one must have practical experience to truly make a
choice. Of course, that's nonsense. One does not have to murder someone to
know that murder is not something one would particularly like to do. Indeed,
we make choices in our lives each day without personal experience to back it
up. Your demand for more here shows a serious lack of respect for people's
ability to make their own choices.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

  #5   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 10:33 AM
Kim W5TIT
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

The phrasing used in your posts
attempt to make it so. Thus naturally
I will dispute the contention that you
are trying to make it a fact without
any supporting data. Not only are
you trying to call it a fact but attempting
to make others believe it, again
without supporting data.



You're not going to let it go, are you, Dee? I said what I believe to be
fact. Lacking any real data, that is all I could possibly do.

I based that on the fact that Morse code has been widely featured in
movies (Titantic to War Movies), television (Hogan's Heros to Westerns to
Sci-Fi), books, children's toys, the military decades ago, youth
organizations, and so on. So, again, I do think it is a fact that most
people in this country today know about Morse code. They may not know what
it's called, how to do it, or whatever, but only a truly isolated person
would not know at least something about it. That is especially true for
anyone interested in radio (shortwave listeners, potential new hams, and

so
on).

You haven't provided anything beyond your own opinion to dispute any of
that. Instead, you assault my choice of words and then insist, even if

true,
that is not enough - that one must have practical experience to truly make

a
choice. Of course, that's nonsense. One does not have to murder someone to
know that murder is not something one would particularly like to do.

Indeed,
we make choices in our lives each day without personal experience to back

it
up. Your demand for more here shows a serious lack of respect for people's
ability to make their own choices.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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


Dwight...

If you don't mind, lemmee see if this works for you. Here's a post I'll use
for an example:

::::::::::
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Alun
writes:

I think you're missing the point. I took _code_ tests to get _phone_
subbands. There's no logic in that. Never was, even from the beginning.


Sure there is. Here it is, though you may argue that it doesn't hold much

water
today:


In addition, anyone one who thinks they took the code tests to get phone
subbands isn't really viewing it from the right perspective anyway. The
code test, as well as the additional writtens, was to get HF privileges or
should have been. It happens that phone privileges are included when one
earns HF privileges.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE
::::::::::

Now to counter Dee on the point that she made, where she essentially states
to you that you presented something as fact (which isn't exactly clear that
you did...by the way; she *interpreted* something you said as fact), then
there's a lot to be said for her needing to present "statistical data" to
show that anyone--*anyone*--who took the code test...was to get HF
privileges. Now, in defense of her statement, she did qualify that
statement with the phrase, "or should have been." But, the qualifier does
not negate that she emphatically states "anyone who thinks they took the
code tests to get phone subbands isn't really viewing it from the right
perspective anyway." The implication between the conclusion that is derived
from the two combined statements is that Dee is--we could say, as she has
done with you--stating that it is a fact that anyone who takes the code test
did so to get HF privileges. Period.

Where's *that* statistical data?

This could be done over and over. So, in true debate form--at least as far
as I see it--the counter would be to fight fire with fire.

Fact is, though, you did open yourself up with the statement, "Few people
today (especially boys and men) have not learned code, or at least played
around with it, at some point in their lives." I mean, after all, you have
to see that such a statement would tend to be disagreed with. I would
disagree with it, wholeheartedly, if I was inclined to nitpick--or if I was
inclined to feel like I had nothing else to argue. It's a statement that is
quite arguable. There are not many people who have "learned code" as you
say. That's, uh, not a fact by the way.

Kim W5TIT




  #6   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 06:04 PM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

(snip) Fact is, though, you did open yourself
up with the statement, "Few people today
(especially boys and men) have not learned
code, or at least played around with it, at
some point in their lives." (snip)



Is that sentence what this is all about, Kim (and Dee)? If so, lets forget
about debate rules and discuss how to write instead. I wrote a paragraph
which contained a lead, supposition or hypothesis, and a conclusion. The
"fact" mentioned in the lead of that paragraph is in the conclusion of that
paragraph, not in any single sentence leading up to that conclusion. The
sentence quoted above is supposition leading to the conclusion. The
conclusion of that paragraph, and the "fact" mentioned in the lead of that
paragraph, is, "...most adults today are familiar enough with code to know
whether they have any real interest in it." Based on what I wrote in that
paragraph, and in subsequent messages, I do believe that conclusion to be
fact.

And the conclusion of this message is, if that sentence is indeed the root
Dee's objection, we've spent several days arguing over two entirely
different things - that sentence in Dee's case and the overall conclusion in
my case.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

  #7   Report Post  
Old December 9th 03, 01:26 AM
Kim W5TIT
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

(snip) Fact is, though, you did open yourself
up with the statement, "Few people today
(especially boys and men) have not learned
code, or at least played around with it, at
some point in their lives." (snip)



Is that sentence what this is all about, Kim (and Dee)? If so, lets

forget
about debate rules and discuss how to write instead. I wrote a paragraph
which contained a lead, supposition or hypothesis, and a conclusion. The
"fact" mentioned in the lead of that paragraph is in the conclusion of

that
paragraph, not in any single sentence leading up to that conclusion. The
sentence quoted above is supposition leading to the conclusion. The
conclusion of that paragraph, and the "fact" mentioned in the lead of that
paragraph, is, "...most adults today are familiar enough with code to know
whether they have any real interest in it." Based on what I wrote in that
paragraph, and in subsequent messages, I do believe that conclusion to be
fact.

And the conclusion of this message is, if that sentence is indeed the

root
Dee's objection, we've spent several days arguing over two entirely
different things - that sentence in Dee's case and the overall conclusion

in
my case.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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


Well, I am actually *supposing* that is what it is that Dee is basing the
major part of the discussion on. Dee? (PS--it doesn't matter a whoot for
me, I think I'm not so driven by statements as I am concepts).

Kim W5TIT


  #8   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 10:57 AM
N2EY
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article et, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

I based that on the fact that Morse code has been widely featured in
movies (Titantic to War Movies), television (Hogan's Heros to Westerns to
Sci-Fi), books, children's toys, the military decades ago, youth
organizations, and so on. So, again, I do think it is a fact that most
people in this country today know about Morse code.


Well, I simply disagree. Most people in the USA don't really know what Morse
code is.

btw, the 1997 James Cameron film had no significant Morse code in it at all.
Nor any real mention of the role played by radio. You have to see the 1956
flick "A Night To Remember" for that.

They may not know what
it's called, how to do it, or whatever, but only a truly isolated person
would not know at least something about it.


If they do't even know what it's called, they can hardly make an informed
judgement about it.

That is especially true for
anyone interested in radio (shortwave listeners, potential new hams, and so
on).


Not from what I've seen whenever I've demonstrated Morse code.

73 de Jim, N2EY
  #9   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 06:25 PM
Dwight Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"N2EY" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" writes:
I based that on the fact that Morse code has
been widely featured in movies... (snip)


Well, I simply disagree. Most people in the USA
don't really know what Morse code is.



How can you say that, Jim? As I said, Morse code has been shown in some
form or another in perhaps several hundred movies, television shows, and
news broadcasts, over the last forty or fifty years. One would almost have
to live in a cave without electric power to have not heard code at least
several times and not know it is sent with a key (telegraph or other).
Because of that, I think it is absurd to suggest that most don't know what
Morse code is. They may not know the details, but they most certainly do
know what it is.


If they do't even know what it's called, they can
hardly make an informed judgement about it.



Why do they have to know what something is called to make an informed
judgement about it? I may not know what a certain crane is called (or how it
works), but can still make an informed judgement not to stand under any load
that crane may be moving.


That is especially true for anyone interested in radio
(shortwave listeners, potential new hams, and so
on).


Not from what I've seen whenever I've demonstrated
Morse code.



What are you basing that conclusion on? I don't doubt that those people
didn't know how to send code, but you'll never convince me that they didn't
even know what Morse code was.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

  #10   Report Post  
Old December 8th 03, 06:49 PM
KØHB
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N2EY" wrote


Well, I simply disagree. Most people in the USA don't really know what

Morse
code is.


I suppose that depends on what 'is' really is.

If I walk up to 100 random people over the age of 10 in a shopping mall and
ask them "what is the Morse code", I'm sure every one them would give me an
answer. You'd get answers like:

"The alphabet in dots and dashes".
"Those clicks they used to send telegrams in the cowboy movies."
"SOS"
"Those beeps and boops I used to hear on my SW receiver."
"A barrier to entry into HF amateur radio." [The devil made me say that.]
etc., etc., etc.

My point is that most people in the USA have at least a passing familiarity
with *what* Morse code is, even if they can't recite the code for each
letter/numeral.

73, de Hans, K0HB






Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The 14 Petitions Len Over 21 Policy 3 November 10th 03 12:31 AM
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing Len Over 21 Policy 0 October 22nd 03 11:38 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 Radionews Policy 0 September 20th 03 04:13 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 Radionews General 0 September 20th 03 04:12 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 Radionews Dx 0 September 20th 03 04:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017