Hey, get a clue, if he doesn't have a license right now--he shortly
will when CW has been dropped!!! ROFLOL!!!

Don't ya hope he doesn't off freq one kc on your QSO and have a go?

John

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On 21 Jul 2005 13:12:53 -0700, "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


Does not matter...you are for the removal of r=the code requirement.
Whatever the reasons given, you won't accept them. Tell me, do you
have a ham licence?