|
Handheld works, Cell Phone Doesn't
http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15
KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
... http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15 KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. - Mike KB3EIA - I've said it before and I'll say it again and again--because I truly believe it: carry any and all forms of communication that you are capable of using and have the ability to have; including FRS, GMRS, CB, amateur, and other radio; flagging systems; flares, whatever. Doesn't matter what you've got--as long as it gets attention. Kim W5TIT |
Barry OGrady wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:48:44 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote: http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15 KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. What did he use the meters for? To set the handheld on after he was done, silly. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. I thought there was no use for meters now that we have LCD displays. LCD's pretty much suck at some things with the exception of the new ICOM uberrig. - Mike KB3EIA - -Barry ======== "I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His nonexistence could excuse Him." [A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)] Web page: http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information. |
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:48:44 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote: KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. My brother's a 4x4er and showed me the following link. Ham Operators Save Life http://www.highriders.ca/cgi-bin/gallery/album39 Tony |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15 KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. Who said that? Certainly Lenover21 and William have said words to that effect. What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. Particularly in metro areas. The above example is the exception that proves the rule. I think Kim said it best about taking whatever you can along with you. Here in mountianous Central PA there are places *in the middle of town* where the signal simply goes away. If I had to stake my life on getting through, I would use my HT in our area. And that is my point here. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Count me for three handhelds and one "portable" (Yahoo FT290MKII with
battery pack and tewescoping antenna). No cell phone. |
Kindly repost where I said that.
|
bb wrote:
Kindly repost where I said that. Is this in reply to something I wrote, Brian? Wow, we gotta get you a new mailreader! At any rate, I'm trying to look it up now, but you've had a lot of name changes on the newsgroup. - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. Who said that? What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. Hams did SOME emergency calling in the distant past, but it was rather minor even in the past half century compared to all the other forms of communications available to citizens. Particularly in metro areas. Really? I live in a "metro area." Greater Los Angeles (counting the 82 other communities besides L.A. city) has a population of 10 million. There has been NO dependence on amateur radio for any emergency communications for decades, not prime, not secondary, not even tertiary level in decades...and that includes the huge harbor facilities of San Pedro - Long Beach and all the marinas up and down the immediate coast. USCG depends on the VHF radios of the maritime life here for life-saving efforts just as they do in other coastal and inland waterways. The above example is the exception that proves the rule. Nothing is "proved" other than resourcefulness of human beings faced with any sort of emergency. About three years ago a teenage girl heard a call for help on her FRS handie-talkie, an action acted upon that resulted in a half dozen mountain climbers being rescued quickly in the state of Washington. That was in the state newspapers with some exposure on the national press. By your "exception logic," FRS radios are "vital to emergency communications." Tsk, and FRS isn't licensed radio, either! You should really confine your fantasyland imaginings to your lulls between "Type 7" radio contacts...and remember that amateur radio is basically a HOBBY activity done for fun, not some heroic life-saving "service" to the nation. |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. Who said that? What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. 'Cept it was a misquote. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: Len, for some reason you are double posting. Though you might want to know... - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Ain't no "misquote." Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting." I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. 'Cept it was a misquote. Except it was NOT a "misquote." |
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15 KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. Who said that? Certainly Lenover21 and William have said words to that effect. If they did say such things, they're just plain wrong. Not that either one will ever admit to it ;-) Tsk. The "massager" (of raw license data) is ALWAYS correct and ALWAYS the judge of what is "right" and what is "wrong." :-) So...there's a dispute with the U.S. Census Bureau on the number of cell phone subscribers in the USA? [about 100 million] Tsk. Naturally our regular is more correct than the lawful, official source of population data in the USA. All others disagreeing with him are "just plain wrong." And that's a plain, simple fact. Doesn't mean ham radio plays no role at all, just that in many places and situations, a cell phone will make a 911 call that used to be made by a ham with a handheld. So...a "ham with a handheld" was the previous source of "911 calls?" That's strange because the "911" emergency number is intended to be used solely with the telephone infrastructure. There's no (and never was) any provision in the U.S. amateur radio regulations to tie "911" (or even an equivalent) into any Public Safety communications. Those who are able to contact "911" through amateur radio repeaters can do so solely because the repeater controller has added such features to the repeater. Not all repeaters are so equipped every place in the country. Agreed! But a lot of that isn't about the mountains - it's about the customer density and how fast they are building up the cell networks. Four years ago my wife and I drove back to the midwest. We had not done so (together or separately) since more than ten years past. The number of quite obvious Cell Sites seen just from the highway were astounding in comparison to the past decade. Here's a "plain simple fact:" The U.S. Census Bureau reported that the number of cellular telephone subscribers in the USA amounted to one in three citizens two years ago. At approximately 300 million population, that is 100 million subscribers. [at least one cell phone for each subscriber... :-) ] Denial that the cellular telephone system is BIG doesn't say much for your credibility. It is FAR bigger than the number of U.S. hams with handheld transceivers. Remember when the shuttle burned up on reentry, and volunteers went out in search of shuttle pieces? Turned out that ham radio was better suited to the search parties' comm needs than cell phones were. Tsk, tsk. Sinning by omission. Here's a plain, simple fact: The shuttle's re-entry debris "footprint" was nearly a thousand miles long, mostly over the sunbelt area of the USA. The MAJORITY of debris recovery groups were or were under the guidance of government personnel. [as it should be considering the STS is a government project] The ARRL (who regularly slants "news" highly in favor of amateurs) did not point out that a FEW areas used radio amateurs for help in locating shuttle debris. [go argue with NASA if there is personal disagreement with that statement] THOUSANDS of non-radio-amateur citizens helped in searching for shuttle re-entry debris. Quite a few more than hams. You do a disservice to those citizens by not acknowledging their voluntary contributions of time and effort. Yes, SOME radio amateurs did help in the shuttle debris recovery effort. Agreed. However, to say that "amateur radio was better suited" to that is a dumb thing to say considering the higher number of already-available, already-proven capability of government and public safety agency handheld transceivers used every day. |
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: http://www.arrl.org/?news_list_off=15 KA4NMA was in an accident recently and used his handheld on two meters to call for help. And I thought that there was no use for the things since we all have cell phones now. Who said that? Certainly Lenover21 and William have said words to that effect. If they did say such things, they're just plain wrong. Not that either one will ever admit to it ;-) Tsk. The "massager" (of raw license data) is ALWAYS correct and ALWAYS the judge of what is "right" and what is "wrong." :-) So...there's a dispute with the U.S. Census Bureau on the number of cell phone subscribers in the USA? [about 100 million] Tsk. Naturally our regular is more correct than the lawful, official source of population data in the USA. All others disagreeing with him are "just plain wrong." And that's a plain, simple fact. Doesn't mean ham radio plays no role at all, just that in many places and situations, a cell phone will make a 911 call that used to be made by a ham with a handheld. So...a "ham with a handheld" was the previous source of "911 calls?" That's strange because the "911" emergency number is intended to be used solely with the telephone infrastructure. There's no (and never was) any provision in the U.S. amateur radio regulations to tie "911" (or even an equivalent) into any Public Safety communications. Those who are able to contact "911" through amateur radio repeaters can do so solely because the repeater controller has added such features to the repeater. Not all repeaters are so equipped every place in the country. Agreed! But a lot of that isn't about the mountains - it's about the customer density and how fast they are building up the cell networks. Four years ago my wife and I drove back to the midwest. We had not done so (together or separately) since more than ten years past. The number of quite obvious Cell Sites seen just from the highway were astounding in comparison to the past decade. Here's a "plain simple fact:" The U.S. Census Bureau reported that the number of cellular telephone subscribers in the USA amounted to one in three citizens two years ago. At approximately 300 million population, that is 100 million subscribers. [at least one cell phone for each subscriber... :-) ] Denial that the cellular telephone system is BIG doesn't say much for your credibility. It is FAR bigger than the number of U.S. hams with handheld transceivers. Remember when the shuttle burned up on reentry, and volunteers went out in search of shuttle pieces? Turned out that ham radio was better suited to the search parties' comm needs than cell phones were. Tsk, tsk. Sinning by omission. Here's a plain, simple fact: The shuttle's re-entry debris "footprint" was nearly a thousand miles long, mostly over the sunbelt area of the USA. The MAJORITY of debris recovery groups were or were under the guidance of government personnel. [as it should be considering the STS is a government project] The ARRL (who regularly slants "news" highly in favor of amateurs) did not point out that a FEW areas used radio amateurs for help in locating shuttle debris. [go argue with NASA if there is personal disagreement with that statement] THOUSANDS of non-radio-amateur citizens helped in searching for shuttle re-entry debris. Quite a few more than hams. You do a disservice to those citizens by not acknowledging their voluntary contributions of time and effort. Yes, SOME radio amateurs did help in the shuttle debris recovery effort. Agreed. However, to say that "amateur radio was better suited" to that is a dumb thing to say considering the higher number of already-available, already-proven capability of government and public safety agency handheld transceivers used every day. |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Ain't no "misquote." Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting." I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. 'Cept it was a misquote. Except it was NOT a "misquote." |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Len, for some reason you are double posting. Though you might want to know... I'm not responsible for that. AOL is responsible since they had messed up the bits on my account. AOL was notified and they cleared up things but apparently resent old posts waiting to go. I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go to the next message. |
Lenof21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: Len, for some reason you are double posting. Though you might want to know... I'm not responsible for that. AOL is responsible since they had messed up the bits on my account. AOL was notified and they cleared up things but apparently resent old posts waiting to go. Why would they resent your old posts? 8^) I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go to the next message. So what you're saying is that you *don't* want to know, eh? - Mike KB3EIA |
Lenof21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. I read your reply. I don't understand why you think that I should bother all those people when Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting." Is it bullsnit when Jim wrote: I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. A brag that was never written. 'Cept it was a misquote. Except it was NOT a "misquote." It would appear to me, that it is very much a misquote. Here however is an exact quote that is quite applicable: I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go to the next message. If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Lenof21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. No, no you didn't. You made a mistake. 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. I read your reply. I don't understand why you think that I should bother all those people when Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting." Looks like a misquote by Len from here. Is it bullsnit when Jim wrote: I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. A brag that was never written. I kinda missed ya on that one, Mike. 'Cept it was a misquote. Except it was NOT a "misquote." Of course it *was* a misquote by Len, but he won't admit it. It would appear to me, that it is very much a misquote. Here however is an exact quote that is quite applicable: I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go to the next message. If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Subject: Handheld works, Cell Phone Doesn'
From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 1/3/2005 7:56 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Not a misquote, Jim...A deliberate attempt to misdirect. You'd expect LESS from Lennie...??? Lennie was trying to make it appears as though you claimed Amateurs were the one's doing 9-1-1 communications...NOT your intent of reporting emergency situations TO 9-1-1. Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Dinn't happen. Yet another manifestation of Lennie's altered reality. Stupid. Transparent. Unfortuntely he think's it's a brick wall no one can see through. Silly Lennie. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. Sure enough. That a person might make a 911 call using a cell phone is not the issue. That having cell phones make 911 calls is perhaps the best use of the things. but it still isn't the issue. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. You didn't write "communications anywhere in there. There is also a world of difference between "911 type reporting" (which is a quote) and "do the 911 communications", which is what you were quoted as saying. A person using a cell phone to report a 911 type situation is not "doing the 911 communications". They are reporting a situation. Same as if you called using an HT or a phone booth. Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. 'Cuz you didn't. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. I still want to know why those people would want to talk to me about a misquote. 8^) And I apologize in advance to anyone who would like me to shut up! 8^) I read your reply. I don't understand why you think that I should bother all those people when Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Just don't give us this bullsnit about "misquoting." Looks like a misquote by Len from here. Is it bullsnit when Jim wrote: I don't think so. That's a fantasy brag far above the membership agitprop of the ARRL. A brag that was never written. I kinda missed ya on that one, Mike. You made no fantasy brag. You wrote a simple statement that cell phones have largely replaced Hams calling in emergency reports. That is simply true. 'Cept it was a misquote. Except it was NOT a "misquote." Of course it *was* a misquote by Len, but he won't admit it. Admission is not required. It would appear to me, that it is very much a misquote. Here however is an exact quote that is quite applicable: I just send them. If you no like them, hit the ENTER key and go to the next message. If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... |
In article , PAMNO
(the paragon of Truth and Virtue, he say) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. ...must have been in a galaxy far, far away from this one. :-) Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Verbatim copying of actual, posted statements just a few days ago "can't be recalled?" Bad case of short-term memory loss. See a real MD. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Ol' George (Orwell) should have been around to see this parody of "1984." :-) J.P. denies having said something (or wrote) and Coslo keeps trying to stick his hockey puck in here, and both are having a fun time pretending to be honorable and virtuous paragons of truth, justice, and the ARRL way. Seems like there SHALL BE NO ARGUMENTS WITH PCTA EXTRAS!!! Ever. :-) If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. J.P. didn't take such advice. :-) Coslo keeps jumping in on others postings, acting like an immoderate moderator in an unmoderated forum. It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Now, now, don't get testy. :-) You aren't following the Moderator Manual, just doing 5 Corrections per Minute for someone else's posting. Real Moderators can do 20, not just 5. :-) . |
Lenof21 wrote:
In article , PAMNO (the paragon of Truth and Virtue, he say) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. ...must have been in a galaxy far, far away from this one. :-) Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Verbatim copying of actual, posted statements just a few days ago "can't be recalled?" Bad case of short-term memory loss. See a real MD. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Ol' George (Orwell) should have been around to see this parody of "1984." :-) J.P. denies having said something (or wrote) and Coslo keeps trying to stick his hockey puck in here, and both are having a fun time pretending to be honorable and virtuous paragons of truth, justice, and the ARRL way. I'll admit, I am having fun. Seems like there SHALL BE NO ARGUMENTS WITH PCTA EXTRAS!!! Ever. :-) Oh dear, I know at least Jim and myself love a good row! I like accurate quotes tho'! If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. J.P. didn't take such advice. :-) Coslo keeps jumping in on others postings, acting like an immoderate moderator in an unmoderated forum. Don't you just *hate it* when that happens? It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Good point. No one said that though. Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] Where on earth did he say that? Another of these "quotes"? Hams used VHF HF, and an internet link during the debris search. I don't know if they used UHF or not This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... It is there, you just have to look for it! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote: Lenof21 wrote: In article , PAMNO writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. ...must have been in a galaxy far, far away from this one. :-) Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. I don't think there are any facts that would convince Len. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Wrong again, Len Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Verbatim copying of actual, posted statements just a few days ago "can't be recalled?" Bad case of short-term memory loss. See a real MD. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Ol' George (Orwell) should have been around to see this parody of "1984." :-) You mean the way you deny history, Len? J.P. denies having said something (or wrote) and Coslo keeps trying to stick his hockey puck in here, and both are having a fun time pretending to be honorable and virtuous paragons of truth, justice, and the ARRL way. I'll admit, I am having fun. Seems like there SHALL BE NO ARGUMENTS WITH PCTA EXTRAS!!! Ever. :-) Oh dear, I know at least Jim and myself love a good row! I like accurate quotes tho'! If you like accuracy, stay away from Len ;-) If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. J.P. didn't take such advice. :-) Coslo keeps jumping in on others postings, acting like an immoderate moderator in an unmoderated forum. Don't you just *hate it* when that happens? Wonder where you learned that , Mike? It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Good point. No one said that though. Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. Where? J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] Where on earth did he say that? Another of these "quotes"? Hams used VHF HF, and an internet link during the debris search. I don't know if they used UHF or not What I *did* say was that ham radio was much more effective than cell phones in that effort. But don't take my word for it. Read what someone who *was there* wrote: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...9?dmode=source Was Len there, searching for shuttle debris? I don't think so. This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... It is there, you just have to look for it! Indeed. ;-) 73 de Jim, N2EY |
wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Lenof21 wrote: In article , PAMNO writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: snip Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. I don't think there are any facts that would convince Len. prolly not. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Wrong again, Len And I wonder where the "never said that" quote came from. Was that supposed to be me? Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Verbatim copying of actual, posted statements just a few days ago "can't be recalled?" Bad case of short-term memory loss. See a real MD. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Ol' George (Orwell) should have been around to see this parody of "1984." :-) You mean the way you deny history, Len? J.P. denies having said something (or wrote) and Coslo keeps trying to stick his hockey puck in here, and both are having a fun time pretending to be honorable and virtuous paragons of truth, justice, and the ARRL way. I'll admit, I am having fun. Seems like there SHALL BE NO ARGUMENTS WITH PCTA EXTRAS!!! Ever. :-) Oh dear, I know at least Jim and myself love a good row! I like accurate quotes tho'! If you like accuracy, stay away from Len ;-) If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. J.P. didn't take such advice. :-) Coslo keeps jumping in on others postings, acting like an immoderate moderator in an unmoderated forum. Jim, I'm beginning to think that Len takes umbrage at my posts. Just imagine! A poster making posts within a thread! Especially "jumping in on others postings" (an actual quote) in a thread that I started. My goodness, the nerve of some hockey pucks!! 8^) Don't you just *hate it* when that happens? Wonder where you learned that , Mike? Why SNL of course! It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Good point. No one said that though. Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Twilight Zone - awesome show. A few episodes kind of date, but still highly watchable. A+ Lost in Space - Bleh, although I thought June Lockhart was pretty sharp in her aluminum foil space suit. C- Outer Limits - The intro can still give me goosebumps. I loved it when I was a kid. Now some of the episodes seem a little uneven. B+ Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. Where? I think he is referring to the article in QST about communications without radiated energy. I'm extremely skeptical, but who knows what can happen in the quantum world? Who would have figured that you can tell what the spin of a split particle could be affected by the measurement of the other particle that it was split from, without any connection. Note that no radiated energy does not imply no energy used. J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] Where on earth did he say that? Another of these "quotes"? Hams used VHF HF, and an internet link during the debris search. I don't know if they used UHF or not What I *did* say was that ham radio was much more effective than cell phones in that effort. NO question about that. But don't take my word for it. Read what someone who *was there* wrote: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...9?dmode=source Was Len there, searching for shuttle debris? I don't think so. This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... It is there, you just have to look for it! Indeed. ;-) 73 de Jim, N2EY - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , (the paragon of Truth and Virtue, he say) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. ...must have been in a galaxy far, far away from this one. :-) Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] Jim wrote: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Where exactly did Jim say that Hams used to do the 911 communications? Not in any post I can recall. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Verbatim copying of actual, posted statements just a few days ago "can't be recalled?" Bad case of short-term memory loss. See a real MD. Now you go read my reply and, if you have arguments, you can go off and argue with the U.S. Census Bureau, NASA, the FCC, and, for emotional finger-pointing, the families of the astronauts killed in the shuttle burn-up. Whoever. Looks like Len is telling you not to differ with *him*, Mike. Looks like he's trying to tell you to stop pointing out his misquote. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Ol' George (Orwell) should have been around to see this parody of "1984." :-) J.P. denies having said something (or wrote) and Coslo keeps trying to stick his hockey puck in here, and both are having a fun time pretending to be honorable and virtuous paragons of truth, justice, and the ARRL way. I'll admit, I am having fun. Seems like there SHALL BE NO ARGUMENTS WITH PCTA EXTRAS!!! Ever. :-) Oh dear, I know at least Jim and myself love a good row! I like accurate quotes tho'! Tsk. You two "row" your boat all on dry land. Fix your leaks and you can try it in the water. If you don't like my messages, I suggest you do the same. Sounds like good advice. Of course the author of that one won't take his own advice... Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. J.P. didn't take such advice. :-) Coslo keeps jumping in on others postings, acting like an immoderate moderator in an unmoderated forum. Don't you just *hate it* when that happens? It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Good point. No one said that though. It was all written, not said. :-) Let's see...the 911 emergency call system was implemented on the telephone infrastructure. It wasn't implemented through amateur radio. Really. Yes, some amateur repeater operators have added the ability to access the TELEPHONE SYSTEM 911 calling. At least I am told this. :-) So, by the miraculous wish-fulfillment properties of the self- righteous, you now want to infer/imply/never-say-outright (or whatever you do or claim) that amateur radio is responsible for the creation and continuance of the 911 emergency calling system? Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. "CW gets through when nothing else will." Gosh, that sounds like "CW" doesn't even need electricity! :-) Breakthrough in physics! :-) J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] Where on earth did he say that? Another of these "quotes"? According to the rec.radio.amateur.policy newsgroup postings. Tsk. Is AOL giving you trouble also? Hams used VHF HF, and an internet link during the debris search. I don't know if they used UHF or not You were THERE? Along the debris footprint? Did you find anything? Or didn't you just repeat the tale told to you? Which is it? NASA doesn't say that hams were the ONLY ones looking for debris. Well, I should cut you some slack. With all that "serving your country in OTHER ways," it must make you tired and grouchy. Get some rest. You will feel better. This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... It is there, you just have to look for it! Yes, it is there. But the "humor" isn't funny. Problem is, "Laugh-In" is a defunct TV show. Lots of the myths of morse have been defunct longer...but they still live on like ghouls or zombies. You have ghoul friends? Continue to "serve your country in those OTHER ways," good soldier. Posted on 18 Jan 05 |
Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , (the paragon of Truth and Virtue, he say) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Lenof21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Misquote, Len. Jim wrote "reporting". In that he is correct. Since so many (most?) people have a cell phone, it stands to reason that the initial report is more likely to be made by a person using a cell phone. That's it, Mike. Of course there was a time, not so many years ago, when cell phones weren't very common, but hams with mobile rigs were. ...must have been in a galaxy far, far away from this one. :-) Lovely NON-applicable factoid, doesn't explain anything. Of course there were radio amateurs with mobile radios "not so many years ago." There still are. But, there are NO facts presented that those mobile radios were used in emergencies. If they were, there are NO facts presented as to any percentage of "emergency operations" relative to normal amateur radio hobby use. Here's a "plain simple fact:" I replied to J.P.Miccolis' message and quoted his EXACT WORDS. Looks like a misquote on Len's part. Tsk. J.P. "never said that." ? :-) Of course he never said that. He WROTE it. :-) Do you mean when Jim posted: Jim What *has* happened is that cell phones do much if not most of the Jim 911-type Jim reporting that we hams used to do. and you wrote: Lenover21Really? "Hams used to do the 911 communications?" Ain't no "misquote." Sure is. But I don't think Len will admit it, Mike. Tsk, tsk. The "911" communications system was never designed around radio amateurs. [this is beginning to sound like another wish-fulfillment statement done in here by another, "Sorry, Hans, MARS IS amateur radio!" :-) ] No "wish fulfillment", Lennie. Oh dear, I know at least Jim and myself love a good row! I like accurate quotes tho'! Tsk. You two "row" your boat all on dry land. Fix your leaks and you can try it in the water. Leonard, YOU have absolutely NO BUSINESS redressing ANYONE about "fixing leaks". Your rants in this forum are so frought with holes that if you were the Titanic, you would have sunk before the lookouts in the crow's nest had a chance to say "ICE Berrrrrrr........" It's a Fantasyland. The "911" emergency call system was NOT established with or for amateur use, yet the two paragons keep trying to say it was and that hams DID "911" comms (even though it did not exist then). Good point. No one said that though. It was all written, not said. Yes, it was. And you continue to quote out-of-context. Let's see...the 911 emergency call system was implemented on the telephone infrastructure. It wasn't implemented through amateur radio. Really. The IN-CONTEXT parts that you continue to snip in order to make it work for you is that PRIOR to the proliferation of the cellphone, Amateur Radio was one of the principal methods of interface with 9-1-1 for the delivery of emergency calls. It remains an important part of that network. Almost every agency of Federal, state and local government has some provision for the implementation of Amateur-supported alternatives to both the cellphone and landline communications nets. This is not "wish fulfillment" or fantasy. It is documented fact. Yes, some amateur repeater operators have added the ability to access the TELEPHONE SYSTEM 911 calling. At least I am told this. And BEING told this is the only way you'd know. Embarrassing, wot, that some elementary and middle school kids have more practical knowledge on some aspects of "emergency comms" than an octogenarian "radio professional", eh...??? So, by the miraculous wish-fulfillment properties of the self- righteous, you now want to infer/imply/never-say-outright (or whatever you do or claim) that amateur radio is responsible for the creation and continuance of the 911 emergency calling system? Nope...that's a "wish fulfillment" opportunity on YOUR part, Lennie. Twilight Zone. Lost in Space. Outer Limits. Jeff Herman said that hams can do communications with zero power output. "CW gets through when nothing else will." Gosh, that sounds like "CW" doesn't even need electricity! Breakthrough in physics! The "breakthrough in physics" will come when they can create an energy source that can get you off your fat gluteus and into a test session like you siad you'd do FIVE YEAR AGO. J.P. implied that ham HTs were the only practical means of comms among shuttle burn-up debris searching. [all the rest of those thousands and thousands of government and agency HTs were apparently inadequate in the Fantasyland] Where on earth did he say that? Another of these "quotes"? According to the rec.radio.amateur.policy newsgroup postings. Tsk. Is AOL giving you trouble also? He never said any such thing...except in your warped efforts to try and twist what WAS said. Hams used VHF HF, and an internet link during the debris search. I don't know if they used UHF or not You were THERE? Along the debris footprint? Did you find anything? Or didn't you just repeat the tale told to you? Which is it? NASA doesn't say that hams were the ONLY ones looking for debris. No, they weren't. However the radio spectrum from 136Mhz to 156Mhz was the prefered method of ground team communications, and much of that between 144Mhz to 148Mhz. Well, I should cut you some slack. With all that "serving your country in OTHER ways," it must make you tired and grouchy. Get some rest. You will feel better. Professional mental health counselling would help YOU, Lennie...and NOT that K-Tel, correspondence course stuff Mommy does. Oh...I forgot...No kids..Sorry..That was ANOTHER of yet a few dozen disciplines for which you have no practical experience. This is getting to be like Laugh-In but without the humor... It is there, you just have to look for it! Yes, it is there. But the "humor" isn't funny. We ahve yet to see any from you, Lennie...except for some bizzare, self-titillating stuff you seem to enjoy for some resaon. Problem is, "Laugh-In" is a defunct TV show. You don't seem to have a grip on that though, Lennie. For the longest time your AOL "profile" imagined you as the scruffy character played by Arte Johnson who got clobbered by Ruth Buzzy's "bag lady" character when he made inappropriate suggestions to her. Seems to me that you've made a career of making inappropriate suggestions to people on a whole range of subjects and you seem to ENJOY getting clobbered for your stupidity. Lots of the myths of morse have been defunct longer...but they still live on like ghouls or zombies. You have ghoul friends? You do. Roll over an give her a big wet one, Lennie. And tell her it's almost noon...take off the blinders. Continue to "serve your country in those OTHER ways," good soldier. How do YOU "continue to serve your country", Lennie? Yet another epoch ended in 1956? Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
Len Over 21 wrote:
Yes, it is there. But the "humor" isn't funny. Problem is, "Laugh-In" is a defunct TV show. Lots of the myths of morse have been defunct longer...but they still live on like ghouls or zombies. You have ghoul friends? Continue to "serve your country in those OTHER ways," good soldier. Replying a second time to an old post? BTW, I'm not a soldier. - Mike KB3EIA - |
K4YZ wrote: the scruffy character played by Arte Johnson who got clobbered by Ruth Buzzy's "bag lady" character when he made inappropriate suggestions to her. Classic show, Laugh-In. Actually caused some phrases to enter the language ("you bet your bippy"). Also introduced comedy greats such as Lily Tomlin ("one ringy dingy...") and Flip Wilson, who would later have his own show. The characters you describe were named Gladys Ormphby (Ruth Buzzi) and Tyrone F. Horneigh (Arte Johnson). Typical routine: [Gladys is sitting on bench, Tyrone sits down next to her and she scoots over nervously to get away from him] Tyrone: "Would you call my face ruggedly handsome?" [Gladys bashes him over the head with purse] Tyrone: "Would you call my body sensuously attractive?" [Gladys hits him with her purse again] Tyrone: "Would you call my next of kin?" [Tyrone falls off bench] -- Of course the show had its roots in vaudeville and burlesque, and drew on a variety of sources, such as "Pigmeat" Markham ("sock it to me" and "here come da judge"). "Gladys" was developed by Ruth Buzzi, when she was in an off-Broadway show with a minor part as a cleaning lady, and was actually a cleaning lady offstage to make ends meet. Flip Wilson's show, which was sort of descended from Laugh-In, gave us the computer term "WYSIWYG". It was derived from a catchphrase used by Wilson's character "Geraldine Jones", who would often declare "What you see is what you get" and "when you're hot, you're hot". 73 de Jim, N2EY |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com