funkbastler wrote:
... I gotta think that if I managed to learn Morse code, then so
can "they".

I'm sure that drivers licenses applicants can
learn to use buggy whips on their horseless
carriages, but should they be required to?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Only if the buggy whip conveys useful information to the "horseless carrage"
as it did in the case of the horse.

As CW still conveys information as it did in the beginnings of radio the
anology does not hold water...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
om...
funkbastler wrote:
... I gotta think that if I managed to learn Morse code, then so
can "they".

I'm sure that drivers licenses applicants can
learn to use buggy whips on their horseless
carriages, but should they be required to?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Fred Hambrecht wrote:
Only if the buggy whip conveys useful information to the "horseless carrage"
as it did in the case of the horse.

We could probably modify vehicles to respond to
lashes from a buggy whip and eliminate the
accelerator.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

So are you saying that CW no longer works? Not to be judgmental, but your an
idiot.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:35:14 -0400, "Fred Hambrecht"
wrote:
in the begining it conveyed data other radio radio services as well as
the ars today it does not
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Fred Hambrecht wrote:
So are you saying that CW no longer works? Not to be judgmental, but your an
idiot.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:35:14 -0400, "Fred Hambrecht"
wrote:
in the begining it conveyed data other radio radio services as well as
the ars today it does not
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

Even if spelled correctly [you're, not your] Fred is definitely NOT
saying his thing with civility. :-)

Freddie, Mark was saying that - IN THE BEGINNING - ALL radio
services used morse code...and the first US radio regulating
agency wanted all to show competency in this common mode
so that the agency to communicate with all users. That era has
long since passed into oblivion. Just ain't no other radio services
using manual morse code for communications now.

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 21:12:44 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

funkbastler wrote:
... I gotta think that if I managed to learn Morse code, then so
can "they".

I'm sure that drivers licenses applicants can
learn to use buggy whips on their horseless
carriages, but should they be required to?

No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission. Never know when the ol'
grind-o-crunch automatic is gonna give out and ya has to use
something more reliable.

--
-fb-

funkbastler wrote:
No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission.

Would you have 1000 people learn to drive a standard
transmission even though only one person out of those
1000 people benefits from it? The cost/benefit ratio
is extremely high.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:47:59 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

funkbastler wrote:
No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission.

Would you have 1000 people learn to drive a standard
transmission even though only one person out of those
1000 people benefits from it? The cost/benefit ratio
is extremely high.

(I'll go ya one better - make EVERYBODY drive a standard - or a Harley -
and save some oil. Outlaw automatics!)

Ok then - same goes for satellite communications, fast/slow scan
television, packet, EME, and so on. Lots of applicants will never
use those modes, but the questions are on the test, so you
better learn the material.

K2FRD (I think) proposed what I thought was the best solution to
the Morse code issue - keep it as part of the test, but don't
keep it as a show-stopper. I think it would be fair, at least for
the higher grade licenses, to throw it in there with all the other
modes you may never use.... have it on the test, let the applicant
earn some points from it if they can, but don't send 'em home
disappointed if they don't.

--
-fb-

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
funkbastler wrote:
No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission.

Would you have 1000 people learn to drive a standard
transmission even though only one person out of those
1000 people benefits from it? The cost/benefit ratio
is extremely high.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com