Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#241
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 21:32:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: all he can do presently is pass the present day test requirements and then be belittled For claiming that the tests prove that he knows as much as those who passed much more difficult tests, not for not having to pass those more difficult tests. who has made any such claim? you like a lot of the procoders add a lot of things to what people are realy saying |
#242
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
Showing that you DON'T know the difference. I personally don't care why the unit of resistance is named the ohm. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#243
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
I'll bet he didn't derive the shapes of the written numbers from first principles either. That fact goes against your "memorizing is evil" argument. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#244
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
From: Dave Heil on Fri, Aug 11 2006 1:09 pm Email: Dave Heil Groups: rec.radio.amateur.policy Klein fears CHANGE and, perhaps, feelings of obsolescence. I fear that Leonard H. Anderson will go to his reward without ever having obtained an amateur radio license. Oh, no, Kernal Klink is trying to manufacture a "motive" of his own imagining. Tsk, tsk. He gets it WRONG. Klink, can't you get ANYTHING right? My purpose in here is trying to get the morse code test(s) reduced to zero. It is down to just 1 now. Tell us all (from your imagination) why one "should" get an amateur radio license. I am a professional in electronics, have had my Commercial license since 1956, am retired from a career in aerospace electronics with a nice income. I don't NEED a ham license nor am I trying to get one. I'm trying to change the federal law concerning all ham-hobbyists being required to test for morse in this advanced time of the new millennium. Not to worry, Klink, I'll be watching the US Post Office walls for YOUR "reward." :-) Someone who has been a regular worker in electronics (radio is a subset of electronics) ought to damn well know and recognize that the state of the art in electronics has been CONSTANTLY changing. It's sometimes a chore to keep up, whether it be 1950 or 2000 or any time in-between. Don't let us stop you from tending to your chores, Len. BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! You couldn't possible do that. :-) When in doubt of an effective reply, these Fundamentalist Morseodists must resort to some form of denigration. Sigh, they never learn... That's all you've done since your recent reappearance here, Major Hoople. Oh, poor baby! Colonel Klink is bent out of shape because no one loves and adores him and his morsemanship? Tsk, tsk. Some of these Olde Fahrts seem to think their amateurism is on some kind of "higher plane" than ordinary, plebian, work. Obtaining an amateur radio license *is* work, Len. How much DOES it pay? Some of the amateur radio activities we partcipate in are *are* work. Minimum wage? The work isn't compensated. Awwwwwww! Imagine that, a NON-professional amateur! :-) You keep right on looking down your Imperial nose at all us who aren't federally licensed as super-dooper morsemen. It makes you feel all warm and toasty, does it? I'll bet you run around and make like a Prussian feldoffizier to all other hams not wanting morse. "For the "love of it?" :-) It is performed for the love of it. If you ever hope to obtain an amateur radio license, you'll have to indulge in some ordinary, plebian work. No, I won't, Kernal Klunk. I didn't parlay a disk jockey job into fleecing the State Department in being resident ham DX. Cushy. Now you are getting a pension for all that "hard work." Taxpayers are paying you. Hardly "plebian" of YOU, is it? But, having NO answers to my remarks, you made up a lot of scurrilous snit on your own. "For the love of it?" Must have been...it sure as hell had NO ring of "diplomacy" to it. Didn't learn much about diplomacy at State, Klank? Next time, Coolonell, try TRY to answer some of the topics that were addressed...even if NOT to you. Do it "for the love of it." Fork you, you're done... |
#245
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
wrote in message ps.com... From: Dave Heil on Fri, Aug 11 2006 1:09 pm Email: Dave Heil Groups: rec.radio.amateur.policy Klein fears CHANGE and, perhaps, feelings of obsolescence. I fear that Leonard H. Anderson will go to his reward without ever having obtained an amateur radio license. Oh, no, Kernal Klink is trying to manufacture a "motive" of his own imagining. Tsk, tsk. He gets it WRONG. Klink, can't you get ANYTHING right? My purpose in here is trying to get the morse code test(s) reduced to zero. It is down to just 1 now. Tell us all (from your imagination) why one "should" get an amateur radio license. I am a professional in electronics, have had my Commercial license since 1956, am retired from a career in aerospace electronics with a nice income. I don't NEED a ham license nor am I trying to get one. I'm trying to change the federal law concerning all ham-hobbyists being required to test for morse in this advanced time of the new millennium. Not to worry, Klink, I'll be watching the US Post Office walls for YOUR "reward." :-) Someone who has been a regular worker in electronics (radio is a subset of electronics) ought to damn well know and recognize that the state of the art in electronics has been CONSTANTLY changing. It's sometimes a chore to keep up, whether it be 1950 or 2000 or any time in-between. Don't let us stop you from tending to your chores, Len. BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! You couldn't possible do that. :-) When in doubt of an effective reply, these Fundamentalist Morseodists must resort to some form of denigration. Sigh, they never learn... That's all you've done since your recent reappearance here, Major Hoople. Oh, poor baby! Colonel Klink is bent out of shape because no one loves and adores him and his morsemanship? Tsk, tsk. Some of these Olde Fahrts seem to think their amateurism is on some kind of "higher plane" than ordinary, plebian, work. Obtaining an amateur radio license *is* work, Len. How much DOES it pay? My, oh my. How Lennie doth whine. Or his sockpuppet.... Makes no difference. |
#246
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 11 Aug 2006 18:51:28 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: Al Klein wrote: I think I know what I'm claiming a little better than you do. not likely Very juvenile of you. your beef has nothing to do with the tests it is to do with end of the Hazing ritual that is a bout to occour There's a hazing rule in ham radio? Since when? |
#247
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 02:16:22 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Showing that you DON'T know the difference. I personally don't care why the unit of resistance is named the ohm. Which has nothing to do with the discussion. |
#248
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 02:18:17 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: One doesn't, but "first principles" has nothing to do with this discussion - a fact you still don't understand. There's two ways to learn: 1. Memorize knowledge, 2. develop knowledge from first principles. Which has nothing to do with the difference between memorizing answers and learning theory. |
#249
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 02:19:22 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: I'll bet he didn't derive the shapes of the written numbers from first principles either. That fact goes against your "memorizing is evil" argument. And against your claim to understand the conversation. |
#250
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:05:40 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote: "Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... Al Klein wrote: I'll bet he didn't derive the shapes of the written numbers from first principles either. That fact goes against your "memorizing is evil" argument. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and memorizing specific answers to specific questions. The former is called learning, and can be applied to many situations. The latter is called laziness, and teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose. You must be at least 6 years old, Brenda Ann - Cecil can't seem to make that distinction. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Persuing a Career in Electronics, HELP! | Homebrew | |||
Bonafied Proof of LIFE AFTER DEATH -- Coal Mine Rescue | Shortwave |