|
"John Smith" wrote in message ... YEAH!!! Hide all the answers and require 'em to come up with the answers psychically!!! ROFLOL! Get real, any college is test smart, any CS/EE technology student will blow the doors off any test any panel can come up with in damn short order. The ARS written test has been a joke for years. All the answers are published, all one has to do is buy the book and memorize the answers.. no need to actually KNOW anything. How many of these damn 'appliance operators' nowadays can actually build their own equipment? How many can repair the appliances they buy from HRO or Universal Radio (beyond looking on the internet for mods)? |
dxace:
There are simply NO rational, logical and serious arguments against dropping the code requirement with can be posed by a sane mind. Mind you, I said "sane mind!" Or course, insanity is too often given a painted face and an attempt made to feed it to the unwitting... John "dxAce" wrote in message ... "John S." wrote: Unless the FCC operates very differently from other federal agencies the fact that they are using a Notice of Public Rulemaking signifies that they have pretty much made up their collective mind to go ahead with abolishing the morse requirement. I wonder if all of those against change have expended as much energy writing to the FCC as they have repeating the same worn old arguments here on the news group. The only worn out arguments are those expressed by those who want the code test dropped. The majority of whom it would seem are to stupid or lazy or both to take the time to actually learn something. dxAce Michigan USA |
John S. wrote:
Peter Maus wrote: beerbarrel wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:33:52 -0500, "Count Floyd" wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:41:48 UTC, beerbarrel wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:31:02 -0400, dxAce wrote: Joel Rubin wrote: On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:33:36 -0700, "John Smith" wrote: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-05-143A1.doc John Code ability should be one alternative among other technical tests. It seems very odd to freeze a technical test in a museum of bygone technology. If one cannot learn at least a minimal 5 WPM code then they have absolutely no business obtaining an amateur license. dxAce Michigan USA Agreed! Then you should also learn how to ride a horse in order to deliver the mail on time. That's apples to oranges....Cw is the most efficient form of communication in ham radio... That's a truth not limited to ham radio...pilots have known that VOR stations identify in Morse coded since the beginning of VOR. As did/do ADF stations before them. Charts are marked with frequency, station indentifier, and the Morse equivalent. Knowing the code saves a lot of time and helps reduce confusion when navigating by radio. But what possible connection is there between licensing a ham for communications on 40 meters and the ability of a pilot to interpret station designators. Unless the FCC and FAA are merging and they will be offering one combined license for the amateur Hamilot I'll let you think about that remark before you retract it. |
commander buzzard:
Your ideas, thoughts and convictions would not even count in horseshoes--they'd miss even the whole pit!!! John "Cmdr Buzz Corey" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: All that can be taken care of with new bandwidth allocations. All we do is benefit from is finally getting some new and interesting minds to communicate with. Chatting with ancients farts gets old quickly... Eleminating the CW test won't bring in any significant numbers of new minds into ham radio. Ham radio just isn't interesting to the current generation code test or no code test. All your yapping is for naught. |
Carter,I happen to own a 1914 Ford Model T Runabout Roadster car.I have
to push the starting handle in and keep my right hand thumb (I am right handed) and my knees out of the way when I start up that old car.But,once I get it warmed up a little bit,all I have to do is shut off the ignition and let the engine stop running and then switch the ignition back on and if one of the four cylinders is on or near top dead center,all I have to do is kick a tire and that old Ford T Model engine will start right up.(it works every time) What if your modern day vehicle has a burned out starter motor? How are you going to get it started up if it isn't a straight shift and you can't push it down a hill in second gear? cuhulin |
Brenda:
Have you ever looked at older tests??? Get real!!! Silk covered wire, TRF receivers, phenolic insulators, regen receivers, coherers, "crystal detectors" and tubes are already seen mostly in museums... Those old tests look difficult because the methods are now understood better, are totally out-dated, or the equip no longer used! Yanno, even the bandwidth/freq allocs have changed and most would guess wrong on those old questions!!! ROFLOL!!! John "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "John Smith" wrote in message ... YEAH!!! Hide all the answers and require 'em to come up with the answers psychically!!! ROFLOL! Get real, any college is test smart, any CS/EE technology student will blow the doors off any test any panel can come up with in damn short order. The ARS written test has been a joke for years. All the answers are published, all one has to do is buy the book and memorize the answers.. no need to actually KNOW anything. How many of these damn 'appliance operators' nowadays can actually build their own equipment? How many can repair the appliances they buy from HRO or Universal Radio (beyond looking on the internet for mods)? |
Public schools are used by nobody but so-called "teachers" baby sitting
the fed govt dumbed down moron idiot kids. cuhulin |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Brenda: Have you ever looked at older tests??? Get real!!! Silk covered wire, TRF receivers, phenolic insulators, regen receivers, coherers, "crystal detectors" and tubes are already seen mostly in museums... Those old tests look difficult because the methods are now understood better, are totally out-dated, or the equip no longer used! Yanno, even the bandwidth/freq allocs have changed and most would guess wrong on those old questions!!! ROFLOL!!! I don't know what tests you are talking about, but I am talking about CURRENT QUESTION POOLS.. not stuff from the 40's. |
I hate telephones,except my old antique telephones which I do not use.I
am thinking about rigging up my old 1933 Western Electric desk telephone so I can use it.But first,I need to find an exterior bell box with the bells for it.Cell phones sound like a choked chicken when they "ring" Only fools use cell phones. cuhulin |
And the sum of your combined,,,,,,,,,
cuhulin |
I have one of them little yellow plastic Morse Code cards around here
somewhere and I own a couple of Ham Transceiver Radios too.I will not use them though unless I first learn Morse Code and get my license first. cuhulin |
Yep, it pretty much all sucks...
.... only good thing, it beats CW... John wrote in message ... I hate telephones,except my old antique telephones which I do not use.I am thinking about rigging up my old 1933 Western Electric desk telephone so I can use it.But first,I need to find an exterior bell box with the bells for it.Cell phones sound like a choked chicken when they "ring" Only fools use cell phones. cuhulin |
You point is the current question pool is a lot easier than knowing
methods/terminology/material/concepts which have been abandoned/changed/re-evaluated? Really, well that is what I meant too! ROFLOL!!! John "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "John Smith" wrote in message ... Brenda: Have you ever looked at older tests??? Get real!!! Silk covered wire, TRF receivers, phenolic insulators, regen receivers, coherers, "crystal detectors" and tubes are already seen mostly in museums... Those old tests look difficult because the methods are now understood better, are totally out-dated, or the equip no longer used! Yanno, even the bandwidth/freq allocs have changed and most would guess wrong on those old questions!!! ROFLOL!!! I don't know what tests you are talking about, but I am talking about CURRENT QUESTION POOLS.. not stuff from the 40's. |
.... even should your personal attack on me be successful, there is the
real issue we are discussing here... .... get a life, get a brain, you are one champion fool. Not hard to tell you are a canook! (oh, was that a personal attack I just did? grin) John wrote in message ... And the sum of your combined,,,,,,,,, cuhulin |
You got that right about the driving test.I believe I am the only one
here in Jackson,Mississippi (metro area population of about 458,000) who actually knows how to drive.Hey,since I first started driving in 1957,no accidents yet.A few tickets though for parking by a doggy pee hydrant,speeding and crossing a yellow line which shouldn't have been there in the first place.The nut behind the wheel. cuhulin |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... You point is the current question pool is a lot easier than knowing methods/terminology/material/concepts which have been abandoned/changed/re-evaluated? Really, well that is what I meant too! ROFLOL!!! John No. My point is that nobody needs to know ANYTHING to get an amateur radio license, because all the questions in the FCC question pool are published for anyone that wants to look for them. I don't know about where you grew up, but when and where I grew up, this was commonly referred to as cheating, and used to result in a failing grade. The fact is, most current 'appliance operators' don't know anything about the equipment, modes, propogation, or operational/electronics theory behind the equipment they are using. And the aforementioned knowledge is part of the point behind amateur radio. Hams are not inventing anything new.. manufacturers are. |
A few years ago,old man Charles McKitchuen had a Russian ship radio and
an English radio for sale.Both shortwave radios.$50.00 for the russky radio and $35.00 for the limeyland radio,he was asking.I kick myself everyday for not buying those old radios.I am going to phone that old coot in a couple of hours and see if he has come up with something I need to buy.Radios,computer stuff,stuff like that. cuhulin |
A few years ago,one night,an 18 wheeler dude out on I-20 about two miles
from me said he was talking to a guy in New Zealand on his CB radio.I think he said he had either a six hundred watt or eight hundred watt amplifier hooked up to his CB radio. cuhulin |
Brenda:
Do you actually think a ham, in his garage, is going to invent a new type of device, in his garage, which is going to function like a tube or transistor--now that might be possible--just not very likely. They (new hams) need to know the band allocations, they need to know about modern methods of data transmission, data compaction/encryption--to make real advancements. They need to be very computer savvy! Mostly, they need to know how to operate a radio, take a look at the new ones, with smc components and such, no one is going to be building much equipment anymore, maybe linears and antennas, but that is about it. Even if a ham knows how to build a crystal radio, a trf receiver, a regen receiver or a QRP transmitter--he darn sure is NOT going to use it. The new ham gear will be your computer with a pci receiver board and xmitter board stuck into it--maybe an external power amp... Times have changed, the tests are simply changing to reflect those changes... of course the old timers are having a problem adapting--read about peoples views and feelings when the automobile replaced the horse and buggy--took decades and if you read the articles of the time, was hauntingly familiar!!! John "Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "John Smith" wrote in message ... You point is the current question pool is a lot easier than knowing methods/terminology/material/concepts which have been abandoned/changed/re-evaluated? Really, well that is what I meant too! ROFLOL!!! John No. My point is that nobody needs to know ANYTHING to get an amateur radio license, because all the questions in the FCC question pool are published for anyone that wants to look for them. I don't know about where you grew up, but when and where I grew up, this was commonly referred to as cheating, and used to result in a failing grade. The fact is, most current 'appliance operators' don't know anything about the equipment, modes, propogation, or operational/electronics theory behind the equipment they are using. And the aforementioned knowledge is part of the point behind amateur radio. Hams are not inventing anything new.. manufacturers are. |
I don't talk on CB radio much,but I like to listen in once in a
while.There is a lady who drives an 18 wheeler between Birmingham and Dallas and if I happen to be listening to my CB radio when she is passing through Jackson,she says,Hya Larry! (Hya Mary!) cuhulin |
Not a personal attack.And I am not a canuk,I am a Champion Mississippi
Coonass. cuhulin |
MnMikew wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... MnMikew wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... "John S." wrote: beerbarrel wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: John S. wrote: Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test. If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea. Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start with your kids. And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a motor vehicle. The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the theory of radio construction and operation. The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove something about his competence as a radio operator. Copying morse code proves nothing. Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it! Which proves???? I give up... Be a lazy 'tard! dxAce Michigan USA Code proficient. You're sure not phone proficient. Wanna bet? dxAce Michigan USA |
Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: John Smith wrote: All that can be taken care of with new bandwidth allocations. All we do is benefit from is finally getting some new and interesting minds to communicate with. Chatting with ancients farts gets old quickly... Eleminating the CW test won't bring in any significant numbers of new minds into ham radio. Ham radio just isn't interesting to the current generation code test or no code test. All your yapping is for naught. That's just their current excuse for dropping the code. The tired old line about the buggy whips just wasn't cutting it any more. Bottom line, the majority are simply either too stupid or too lazy to take the time to learn it. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
COBOL viable?
Hmmm, you mean in the sense that Egyptian mummies are still "viable?" Well damn, they did make damn durable mummies back then, didn't they??? grin And, COBOL continues to go away slowly... but little new is actually created in it, but uncounted lines of COBOL code is still maintained--like the mummies... John "beerbarrel" wrote in message ... On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:29:47 -0500, "MnMikew" wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Plimmer wrote: I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test. It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa. It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in high school and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree. That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the dinosaurs. Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before with high quality judges and advocates. The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no longer spew out Latin quotations = R.I.P. Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by the year and the once crowded ham bands are now empty. We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this wonderful hobby. Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn the code? If so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code? If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so different today? Laziness? It's like being certified in COBOL when you work on MSSQL, it's a waste of time. But COBOL is still a viable language.... |
Yeah, in fact, that same argument is frequently made in regards to
knitting and crochet--the girls today are too stupid and lazy... Darn, then too, the automobile drivers today are too stupid and too lazy to learn how to properly groom and care for a riding horse these days... Gawd, it just keeps getting worse, don't it? John "dxAce" wrote in message ... Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: John Smith wrote: All that can be taken care of with new bandwidth allocations. All we do is benefit from is finally getting some new and interesting minds to communicate with. Chatting with ancients farts gets old quickly... Eleminating the CW test won't bring in any significant numbers of new minds into ham radio. Ham radio just isn't interesting to the current generation code test or no code test. All your yapping is for naught. That's just their current excuse for dropping the code. The tired old line about the buggy whips just wasn't cutting it any more. Bottom line, the majority are simply either too stupid or too lazy to take the time to learn it. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
LOL...
Never seen one-o-those type of Mississippians before! Might be worth takin' a look at ya! ROFLOL!!! .... good humor... grin John wrote in message ... Not a personal attack.And I am not a canuk,I am a Champion Mississippi Coonass. cuhulin |
John Smith wrote: Yeah, in fact, that same argument is frequently made in regards to knitting and crochet--the girls today are too stupid and lazy... Darn, then too, the automobile drivers today are too stupid and too lazy to learn how to properly groom and care for a riding horse these days... Gawd, it just keeps getting worse, don't it? Yep, your utter bull**** is indeed getting worse! But hey, you keep on trying! For a mere 'tard boy you certainly are entertaining. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dxace:
If you can't see there is an EXACT correlation to the tripe I use to make fun of the tripe you are spitting at us--you are misnamed, and should be called dx-idiot! John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: Yeah, in fact, that same argument is frequently made in regards to knitting and crochet--the girls today are too stupid and lazy... Darn, then too, the automobile drivers today are too stupid and too lazy to learn how to properly groom and care for a riding horse these days... Gawd, it just keeps getting worse, don't it? Yep, your utter bull**** is indeed getting worse! But hey, you keep on trying! For a mere 'tard boy you certainly are entertaining. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: dxace: If you can't see there is an EXACT correlation to the tripe I use to make fun of the tripe you are spitting at us--you are misnamed, and should be called dx-idiot! Difference is 'tard boy... I'm not a dx-idiot! But hey, you keep trying! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-idiot:
This ain't kansas anymore, but hold whatever opinion of yourself you would like... it is a free country... John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: dxace: If you can't see there is an EXACT correlation to the tripe I use to make fun of the tripe you are spitting at us--you are misnamed, and should be called dx-idiot! Difference is 'tard boy... I'm not a dx-idiot! But hey, you keep trying! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: dx-idiot: This ain't kansas anymore, but hold whatever opinion of yourself you would like... it is a free country... Yep, and therefore I am free to recognize you as the 'tard you are! Keep trying, you'll make it someday (maybe). dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-idgit:
Oh gee, and it was so important to me--your opinion of me... Get real, when you find someone who cares of your opinion, you will have found a bigger idgit than yourself! ROFLOL! John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: dx-idiot: This ain't kansas anymore, but hold whatever opinion of yourself you would like... it is a free country... Yep, and therefore I am free to recognize you as the 'tard you are! Keep trying, you'll make it someday (maybe). dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: dx-idgit: Oh gee, and it was so important to me--your opinion of me... Get real, when you find someone who cares of your opinion, you will have found a bigger idgit than yourself! LMAO at the 'tard! Like I really, really care about YOUR opinion of me? ROTFLOLPMP dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-ma'roon:
If you do care, try to do it quietly... For a minute I thought your fantasies had provoked you into another orgasm... John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: dx-idgit: Oh gee, and it was so important to me--your opinion of me... Get real, when you find someone who cares of your opinion, you will have found a bigger idgit than yourself! LMAO at the 'tard! Like I really, really care about YOUR opinion of me? ROTFLOLPMP dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: dx-ma'roon: If you do care, try to do it quietly... For a minute I thought your fantasies had provoked you into another orgasm... Fantasy? Ah yes, the one that exists in your 'tard boy brain! Keep trying, 'tard boy! Meanwhile I'll just keep on laughing. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dxAce wrote:
MnMikew wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... "John S." wrote: beerbarrel wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: John S. wrote: Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test. If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea. Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start with your kids. And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a motor vehicle. The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the theory of radio construction and operation. The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove something about his competence as a radio operator. Copying morse code proves nothing. Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it! Which proves???? I give up... Be a lazy 'tard! dxAce Michigan USA Code proficient. Answer the question, stupid. What is the specific reason for learning an obsolete mode of communication? So what if code is better, so were Beta videotapes, and how long has it been since you've seen one of those? Face the facts: morse code is obsolete, it has been for a long time, and the only ones who demand that the newbies learn it are 60 year old hams who had to learn 20wpm for their ham test in 1962. Code still has a few applications, yes-specifically airplane waypoint beacons, which broadcast in code. But those aren't actually copied by the pilots, instead a light goes on in the cockpit when the plane passes over a beacon, so the pilot knows he's on course. But for ham applications, and marine distress signals, and most everything else, it's obsolete. It's a requirement that was useful in 1920, but it's outlived its usefulness. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
dx-buffoon:
.... just do it quietly... John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: dx-ma'roon: If you do care, try to do it quietly... For a minute I thought your fantasies had provoked you into another orgasm... Fantasy? Ah yes, the one that exists in your 'tard boy brain! Keep trying, 'tard boy! Meanwhile I'll just keep on laughing. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
rd:
Personally, my auto-ident in CW will always be close to my heart, I fail to even notice it anymore... John "running dogg" wrote in message ... dxAce wrote: MnMikew wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... "John S." wrote: beerbarrel wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: John S. wrote: Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test. If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea. Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start with your kids. And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a motor vehicle. The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the theory of radio construction and operation. The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove something about his competence as a radio operator. Copying morse code proves nothing. Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it! Which proves???? I give up... Be a lazy 'tard! dxAce Michigan USA Code proficient. Answer the question, stupid. What is the specific reason for learning an obsolete mode of communication? So what if code is better, so were Beta videotapes, and how long has it been since you've seen one of those? Face the facts: morse code is obsolete, it has been for a long time, and the only ones who demand that the newbies learn it are 60 year old hams who had to learn 20wpm for their ham test in 1962. Code still has a few applications, yes-specifically airplane waypoint beacons, which broadcast in code. But those aren't actually copied by the pilots, instead a light goes on in the cockpit when the plane passes over a beacon, so the pilot knows he's on course. But for ham applications, and marine distress signals, and most everything else, it's obsolete. It's a requirement that was useful in 1920, but it's outlived its usefulness. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
John Smith wrote: dx-buffoon: ... just do it quietly... No thanks. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: rd: Personally, my auto-ident in CW will always be close to my heart, I fail to even notice it anymore... You got one of those on your CB? A 'roger-beep' too? dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com